spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


spacer gif
     Home     Help     Feedback     Subscriptions     Archive     Search     Table of Contents    

First published online March 17, 2006
Journal of Experimental Biology 209, 1197-1205 (2006)
Published by The Company of Biologists 2006
doi: 10.1242/jeb.02090
This Article
Right arrow Summary Freely available
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Related articles in JEB
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Sloman, K. A.
Right arrow Articles by Val, A. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Sloman, K. A.
Right arrow Articles by Val, A. L.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Tribute to R. G. Boutilier: The effect of size on the physiological and behavioural responses of oscar, Astronotus ocellatus, to hypoxia

Katherine A. Sloman1,*, Chris M. Wood2, Graham R. Scott3, Sylvia Wood2, Makiko Kajimura2, Ora E. Johannsson4, Vera M. F. Almeida-Val5 and Adalberto L. Val5

1 School of Biological Sciences, University of Plymouth, Devon, PL4 8AA, UK
2 Department of Biology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada L8S 4K1
3 Department of Zoology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Z4
4 Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Canada Centre for Inland Waters, Burlington, Ontario, Canada L7R 3A6
5 Laboratory of Ecophysiology and Molecular Evolution, INPA, Manaus, Brazil


Figure 1
View larger version (33K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 1. The influence of oxygen tension (mmHg) on mass-specific O2 consumption rate (MO2) in large (N=13; open bars) and small (N=15; hatched bars) oscars. Values are means ± 1 s.e.m. Measurements were made over 20 mmHg intervals. Asterisks and daggers indicate significant differences (P<0.05) from the respective rates at the highest PO2.

 

Figure 2
View larger version (58K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 2. A response surface describing mass-specific O2 consumption rate (MO2) as a function of body mass and PO2 based on data from 35 oscars ranging in mass from 8.8 to 308 g. The model is: logMO2=3.20686+0.786xlog(mass)–0.88913x0.96371PO2 (0.05–0.3 kg fish) (r2=0.948); logMO2=3.28076+0.786xlog(mass)–0.92331x0.97024PO2 (0.01–0.05 kg fish) (r2=0.928), where MO2 is in µmol O2 h–1, mass is in kg, and PO2 is in mmHg.

 

Figure 3
View larger version (17K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 3. (A) Decrease in oxygen tensions (mmHg) over time as nitrogen is bubbled into a glass tank. Oxygen tensions were measured every 5 min in each vertical zone (see key) within the tank and there was no significant zonation of oxygen tension within the tank (P=0.771). (B) The oxygen tension at the time of surfacing of large (open bar) and small oscar (hatched bar). The asterisk indicates a significant difference (t=2.14, P=0.02, N=8); values are means ± s.e.m. The insert shows the correlation between mass of individual fish (g) and the oxygen tension at time of surfacing (P=0.04; r2=0.207).

 

Figure 4
View larger version (26K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 4. (A) Gradient of oxygen tension (mmHg) in a long (2.16 m) shallow tank. Each data point is equidistant along the tank. The shaded area represents the area covered by the floating plant, Pistia stratiotes. (B) Time spent under the shelter of the floating plant, Pistia stratiotes, at the most hypoxic end of the gradient by fish from the large and small groups of oscars, held in either normoxic (~130 mmHg; open bars) or hypoxic (~40 mmHg; hatched bars) water for 1 h prior to being placed into the experimental set-up. There was a significant interaction between hypoxia and size (two-way ANOVA; P<0.01), with the asterisk indicating a significant effect of both size and hypoxia treatment (t-test: P<0.01, N=7 fish per group). All values are means ± s.e.m.

 

Figure 5
View larger version (31K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 5. Changes in behaviour in large and small oscar during progressive hypoxia. Where significant interactions (P<0.05) between hypoxia and size masked changes in behaviour within size classes, one-way ANOVA analyses were performed post hoc to test for statistical differences. (A) Horizontal activity, (B) vertical activity and (C) aggression. Values are means ± s.e.m. Letters denote significant differences within size groups where bars sharing the same letter are not significantly different (one-way ANOVA: P<0.05) and asterisks denote a significant difference between size groups (two-way ANOVA: P<0.001). (D) Relationship between the activity scores of individual fish at different oxygen tensions (Spearman's Rank Correlation: rs=0.667, 0.698, 0.718 for PO2=40, 80 and 136 mmHg, respectively; P<0.001).

 

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?



© The Company of Biologists Ltd 2006