Seasonal, environmental and individual effects on hypoxia tolerance of eastern sand darter (Ammocrypta pellucida)

Impact of turbidity on the gill morphology and hypoxia tolerance of eastern sand darter (Ammocrypta pellucida)

Anthropogenic stressors such as agriculture and urbanization can increase river turbidity, which can negatively impact fish gill morphology and growth due to reduced oxygen in the benthic environment. We assessed the gill morphology, field metabolic rate (FMR), and two hypoxia tolerance metrics (oxygen partial pressure at loss of equilibrium, PO2 at LOE, and critical oxygen tension, Pcrit) of eastern sand darter (Ammocrypta pellucida), a small benthic fish listed as threatened under the Species at Risk Act in Canada, from rivers in southern Ontario. Field trials were conducted streamside in the Grand River (August 2019; mean NTU 8) and in the comparatively more turbid Thames River (August 2020; mean NTU 94) to test the effect of turbidity on each physiological endpoint. Gills were collected from incidental mortalities and museum specimens, and were assessed using hematoxylin and eosin and immunofluorescent staining. The between-river comparison indicated that turbidity significantly increased interlamellar space and filament width but had no significant influence on other gill morphometrics or FMR. Turbidity significantly increased PO2 at LOE (i.e., fish had a lower hypoxia tolerance) but did not significantly impact Pcrit. Therefore, although turbidity influences hypoxia tolerance through LOE, turbidity levels were not sufficiently high in the study rivers to contribute to measurable changes in gill morphology or metabolism in the wild. Determining whether changes in gill morphology or metabolism occur under higherturbidity levels would help resolve the ecological importance of turbidity on species physiology in urban and agricultural ecosystems.

Impacts of temperature and turbidity on the gill physiology of darter species

Fish gills are complex organs that have direct contact with the environment and perform numerous functions including gas exchange and ion regulation. Determining if gill morphometry can change under different environmental conditions to maintain and/or improve gas exchange and ion regulation is important for understanding if gill plasticity can improve survival with increasing environmental change. We assessed gill morphology (gas exchange and ion regulation metrics), hematocrit and gill Na+/K+ ATPase activity of wild-captured blackside darter (Percina maculata), greenside darter (Etheostoma blennioides), and johnny darter (Etheostoma nigrum) at two temperatures (10 and 25 °C) and turbidity levels (8 and 94 NTU). Samples were collected August and October 2020 in the Grand River to assess temperature differences, and August 2020 in the Thames River to assess turbidity differences. Significant effects of temperature and/or turbidity only impacted ionocyte number, lamellae width, and hematocrit. An increase in temperature decreased ionocyte number while an increase in turbidity increased lamellae width. Hematocrit had a species-specific response for both temperature and turbidity. Findings suggest that the three darter species have limited plasticity in gill morphology, with no observed compensatory changes in hematocrit or Na+/K+ ATPase activity to maintain homeostasis under the different environmental conditions.

Physiological differences between wild and captive animals: a century-old dilemma

Laboratory-based research dominates the fields of comparative physiology and biomechanics. The power of lab work has long been recognized by experimental biologists. For example, in 1932, Georgy Gause published an influential paper in Journal of Experimental Biology describing a series of clever lab experiments that provided the first empirical test of competitive exclusion theory, laying the foundation for a field that remains active today. At the time, Gause wrestled with the dilemma of conducting experiments in the lab or the field, ultimately deciding that progress could be best achieved by taking advantage of the high level of control offered by lab experiments. However, physiological experiments often yield different, and even contradictory, results when conducted in lab versus field settings. This is especially concerning in the Anthropocene, as standard laboratory techniques are increasingly relied upon to predict how wild animals will respond to environmental disturbances to inform decisions in conservation and management. In this Commentary, we discuss several hypothesized mechanisms that could explain disparities between experimental biology in the lab and in the field. We propose strategies for understanding why these differences occur and how we can use these results to improve our understanding of the physiology of wild animals. Nearly a century beyond Gause's work, we still know remarkably little about what makes captive animals different from wild ones. Discovering these mechanisms should be an important goal for experimental biologists in the future.