Physiological plasticity to water flow habitat in the damselfish, Acanthochromis polyacanthus: linking phenotype to performance

The relationships among animal form, function and performance are complex, and vary across environments. Therefore, it can be difficult to identify morphological and/or physiological traits responsible for enhancing performance in a given habitat. In fishes, differences in swimming performance across water flow gradients are related to morphological variation among and within species. However, physiological traits related to performance have been less well studied. We experimentally reared juvenile damselfish, Acanthochromis polyacanthus, under different water flow regimes to test 1) whether aspects of swimming physiology and morphology show plastic responses to water flow, 2) whether trait divergence correlates with swimming performance and 3) whether flow environment relates to performance differences observed in wild fish. We found that maximum metabolic rate, aerobic scope and blood haematocrit were higher in wave-reared fish compared to fish reared in low water flow. However, pectoral fin shape, which tends to correlate with sustained swimming performance, did not differ between rearing treatments or collection sites. Maximum metabolic rate was the best overall predictor of individual swimming performance; fin shape and fish total length were 3.3 and 3.7 times less likely than maximum metabolic rate to explain differences in critical swimming speed. Performance differences induced in fish reared in different flow environments were less pronounced than in wild fish but similar in direction. Our results suggest that exposure to water motion induces plastic physiological changes which enhance swimming performance in A. polyacanthus. Thus, functional relationships between fish morphology and performance across flow habitats should also consider differences in physiology.

Calibration of cosmogenic noble gas production based on ³⁶Cl-³⁶Ar ages. Part 2. The ⁸¹Kr-Kr dating technique

We calibrated the ⁸¹Kr-Kr dating system for ordinary chondrites of different sizes using independent shielding-corrected ³⁶Cl-³⁶Ar ages. Krypton concentrations and isotopic compositions were measured in bulk samples from 14 ordinary chondrites of high petrologic type and the cosmogenic Kr component was obtained by subtracting trapped Kr from phase Q. The thus-determined average cosmogenic ⁷⁸Kr/⁸³Kr, ⁸⁰Kr/⁸³Kr, ⁸²Kr/⁸³Kr, and ⁸4Kr/⁸³Kr ratiC(Lavielle and Marti 1988; Wieler 2002). The cosmogenic ⁷⁸Kr/⁸³Kr ratio is correlated with the cosmogenic 22Ne/21Ne ratio, confirming that ⁷⁸Kr/⁸³Kr is a reliable shielding indicator. Previously, ⁸¹Kr-Kr ages have been determined by assuming the cosmogenic production rate of ⁸¹Kr, P(⁸¹Kr)c, to be 0.95 times the average of the cosmogenic production rates of ⁸⁰Kr and ⁸²Kr; the factor Y = 0.95 therefore accounts for the unequal production of the various Kr isotopes (Marti 1967a). However, Y should be regarded as an empirical adjustment. For samples whose ⁸⁰Kr and ⁸²Kr concentrations may be affected by neutron-capture reactions, the shielding-dependent cosmogenic (⁷⁸Kr/⁸³Kr)c ratio has been used instead to calculate P(⁸¹Kr)/P(⁸³Kr), as for some lunar samples, this ratio has been shown to linearly increase with (⁷⁸Kr/⁸³Kr)c (Marti and Lugmair 1971). However, the ⁸¹Kr-Kr ages of our samples calculated with these methods are on average ~30% higher than their ³⁶Cl-³⁶Ar ages, indicating that most if not all the ⁸¹Kr-Kr ages determined so far are significantly too high. We therefore re-evaluated both methods to determine P(⁸¹Kr)c/P(⁸³Kr)c. Our new Y value of 0.70 ± 0.04 is more than 25% lower than the value of 0.95 used so far. Furthermore, together with literature data, our data indicate that for chondrites, P(⁸¹Kr)c/P(⁸³Kr)c is rather constant at 0.43 ± 0.02, at least for the shielding range covered by our samples ([⁷⁸Kr/⁸³Kr]c = 0.119–0.185; [22Ne/21Ne]c = 1.083–1.144), in contrast to the observations on lunar samples. As expected considering the method used, ⁸¹Kr-Kr ages calculated either directly with this new P(⁸¹Kr)c/P(⁸³Kr)c value or with our new Y value both agree with the corresponding ³⁶Cl-³⁶Ar ages. However, the average deviation of 2% indicates the accuracy of both new ⁸¹Kr-Kr dating methods and the precision of the new dating systems of ~10% is demonstrated by the low scatter in the data. Consequently, this study indicates that the ⁸¹Kr-Kr ages published so far are up to 30% too high.