Review of relative fitness (RF) of hatchery- and natural-origin salmon and steelhead

Barry BerejikianNOAA Fisheries

Northwest Fisheries Science CenterResource Enhancement and Utilization Technologies Division

Manchester Research Station

Previous reviews

• Berejikian, B.A., and M.J. Ford. 2004. Review of relative fitness of hatchery and natural salmon. U.S. Dept. Commer., NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-NWFSC-61, 28 p

• Araki, H., B. A. Berejikian, M. J. Ford, and M. S. Blouin. 2008. Fitness of hatchery-reared salmonids in the wild. Evolutionary Applications 1:342-355.

Objectives

• Provide an overview of RF from published and on-going studies

• Focus in on effects in supplementation programs

• Identify some important variables that may influence the outcome of RF studies

• Recommendations regarding future RF studies

Definitions

• Relative fitness: (R/Sh) /(R/Sw)

• Hatchery fish: born in the hatchery

• Wild or natural-origin fish: born in the natural environment

• Hatchery generations: number of generations the hatchery had been operating

Potential causes of differential fitness of hatchery and wild

salmon• Environmental: Incubation and juvenile rearing

environment – age-at-maturity– spawn timing– size-at-age– spawning location

• Genetic– Domestication selection (adaptation to the hatchery) – Intentional artificial selection – Other genetic mechanisms (inbreeding, founder

effects, etc)

From Araki et al. 2007. Science 318:100-103 (Figure 2b)

Re-visiting Araki et al. 2007: The Hood River Study

Fleming et al.(2000)

Kalama R

Cww vsWww

Ccw vs Www

Ford et al. (2006)

Araki et al. (2006)

Hansen et al. (2002)

o

Rela

tive F

itness

From Araki et al. 2007. Science 318:100-103 (Figure 2b)

Revisiting Araki et al. 2007

o

o

o

o

RF: Circles = breeding success based on behavior and egg survival estimates, Triangles = egg-to-parr, Diamonds = adult to parr/smolt, Squares = lifetime

Species: Dark blue = steelhead, green = Atlantic salmon, red = coho salmon, light blue = brown trout, yellow = Chinook, Pink = summer chum salmon

Relative fitness of anadromous salmonids

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

0 5 10 15 20

Hatchery Generations

Re

lati

ve

Fit

ne

ss

NL NL

NL

NL

L/NL

NL

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

L

LL

Locally-derived hatchery broodstocks

RF: Circles = breeding success based on behavior and egg survival estimates, Triangles = egg-to-parr, Diamonds = adult to parr/smolt, Squares = lifetime

Species: Dark blue = steelhead, green = Atlantic salmon, red = coho salmon, light blue = brown trout, yellow = Chinook, pink = summer chum salmon

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Hatchery Generations

Rel

ativ

e F

itn

ess

Supplementation programs

Triangles = egg-to-parr/smolt, Diamonds = adult-to-parr/smolt, Squares = lifetime

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Generations

Re

lativ

e fi

tne

ss

Hood R.

(Cww) Quilcene chum

Wenatchee

Little Sheep Cr.

Catherine Cr

Hood R.

(Ccw)

Pahsimeroi R.

Deschutes

(Wcc)

Density-dependent relative breeding success

• Hatchery male coho salmon competitively inferior to wild males

• Hatchery females spawned later, but suffered higher levels of nest superimposition

• Relative breeding success lower at higher density

Source: Fleming et al. 1993. Ecol. Appl. Table 5.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Low Med High

Spawner density

Re

lati

ve

bre

ed

ing

su

cc

es

s (

%) Female Male Combined

Density dependent relative breeding success

• Male Atlantic salmon competitively inferior to wild males

• 1st generation hatchery fish (Cww vs Www)

• Relative breeding success lower at higher density

Source: Fleming et al. 1997. Behav. Ecol.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

3.9 3.6 2.6

Spawner density (males/m 2)R

elat

ive

bre

edin

g s

ucc

ess

(%)

Gender effects?

Species RF male

RF female

Comments Reference

Coho salmon 0.97 > 0.74 Lifetime Ford et al. 2006

Coho salmon 0.62 < 0.82 Breeding success Fleming and Gross 1993

Chum salmon 0.99 > 0.73 Adult-to-fry Berejikian et al. In press

Atlantic salmon 0.51 < ~1.0 Breeding success Fleming et al. 1997

Steelhead 0.60 = 0.63 Lifetime Ccw v. CwwAraki et al. 2007

Conclusions

– Non-local stocks perform poorly– Single generation effects on RF appear to be

fairly small (except for Araki et al. 2007, 2009)– Very little data on lifetime RF– Varying intensity of competition may influence

relative breeding success– Gender effects are inconsistent– Future studies should focus on genetic fitness

(e.g., Schroder et al. in the Yakima R)

Supplementation programs

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Generations

Rel

ativ

e fi

tnes

s

Hood River Quilcene SC

Wenatchee

Little Sheep Cr.

Catherine Cr

Lostine R

Hood River Steelhead (Www v Cwc)

Pahsimeroi

Deschutes R.