Jens De Meyer

Diet-induced phenotypic plasticity in European eel (Anguilla anguilla).

ABSTRACT Two phenotypes are present within the European eel population: broad-heads and narrow-heads. The expression of these phenotypes has been linked to several factors, such as diet and differential growth. The exact factors causing this dimorphism, however, are still unknown. In this study, we performed a feeding experiment on glass eels from the moment they start to feed. Eels were either fed a hard diet, which required biting and spinning behavior, or a soft diet, which required suction feeding. We found that the hard feeders develop a broader head and a larger adductor mandibulae region than eels that were fed a soft diet, implying that the hard feeders are capable of larger bite forces. Next to this, soft feeders develop a sharper and narrower head, which could reduce hydrodynamic drag, allowing more rapid strikes towards their prey. Both phenotypes were found in a control group, which were given a combination of both diets. These phenotypes were, however, not as extreme as the hard or the soft feeding group, indicating that some specimens are more likely to consume hard prey and others soft prey, but that they do not selectively eat one of both diets. In conclusion, we found that diet is a major factor influencing head shape in European eel and this ability to specialize in feeding on hard or soft prey could decrease intra-specific competition in European eel populations. Highlighted Article: Diet differences lead to head shape dimorphism in European eel; this occurs at a much earlier stage than was originally thought.

Using the whole body as a sucker: Combining respiration and feeding with an attached lifestyle in hill stream loaches (Balitoridae, Cypriniformes)

Small fishes living in fast‐flowing rivers face a harsh environment as they can easily be swept away by the rapid currents. To survive such circumstances, teleosts evolved a wide variety of attachment mechanisms, based on friction, negative pressure or both. Balitorinae (Balitoridae, Cypriniformes) are exceptional in using their whole body as an adhesive apparatus. We investigated the morphological adaptations of Balitorinae by studying the osteology and myology of four species (Beaufortia leveretti, Sewellia lineolata, Pseudogastromyzon myersi, and Gastromyzon punctulatus) using clearing and staining, serial cross‐sections and CT‐scanning. A kinematic analysis was performed to study the respiration and feeding mechanisms and to identify key structures in these mechanisms. Our research showed that the whole body of Balitorinae acts as a suction disc, with friction‐enhancing structures (unculi) on the thickened anterior rays of the paired fins. The abruptly rising head profile, supported by the extremely enlarged lacrimal bone and the flat ventral body surface facilitate effective substrate attachment. During attachment, the pelvic girdle is pulled anterodorsally, suggesting the formation of a negative pressure underneath the body. Detachment by water inflow underneath the body is prevented by three mechanisms. 1) Barbels control the water inflow by detachment and reattachment to the substrate. 2) Most water present underneath the body is removed during inspiration. 3) Excess water is regularly removed by movements of the posterior pectoral fin rays. The balitorine body is thus modified as such that it allows effective attachment, while not impairing respiration. Comparison with other teleosts living in similar environments shows that most species use more locally concentrated modifications of the paired fins and/or the mouth for attachment. The high diversity in teleostean adhesive apparatuses and associated myological modifications suggest a substantial functional convergent evolution, without necessarily highly convergent anatomical adaptations. J. Morphol. 275:1066–1079, 2014.

Built to bite? Differences in cranial morphology and bite performance between narrow‐ and broad‐headed European glass eels

The presence of two phenotypes in a single species is a widespread phenomenon, also observed in European eel (Anguilla anguilla). This dimorphism has been related to dietary differences in the subadult elver and yellow eel stages, with broad‐heads generally feeding on harder and/or larger‐bodied prey items than narrow‐heads. Nevertheless, both broad‐ and narrow‐headed phenotypes can already be found among glass eels, the stage preceding the elver eel stage. As these glass eels are considered nonfeeding, we investigate here to what degree the observed variation in head width is reflected in variation in the musculoskeletal feeding system, as well as whether this reflects the same variation observed in the older, dimorphic yellow eels. Additionally, we investigate whether musculoskeletal differences between broad‐ and narrow‐headed glass eels have implications on their feeding performance and could thus impact prey preference when eels start feeding. Therefore, we compared the cranial musculoskeletal system of five broad‐ and narrow‐headed glass eels using 3D‐reconstructions and simulated the glass eels bite force using the data of the muscle reconstructions. We found that the variation in the musculoskeletal system of glass eels indeed reflects that of the yellow eels. Broader heads were related to larger jaw muscles, responsible for mouth closure. Accordingly, broad‐heads could generate higher bite forces than narrow‐headed glass eels. In addition, broader heads were associated with higher coronoid processes and shorter hyomandibulae, beneficial for dealing with higher mechanical loadings and consequently, harder prey. We, thus, show that head width variation in glass eels is related to musculoskeletal differences which, in turn, can affect feeding performance. As such, differences in prey preference can already take place the moment the eels start feeding, potentially leading to the dimorphism observed in the elver and yellow eel stage.

Head shape disparity impacts pollutant accumulation in European eel

Several aspects of the life cycle of the critically endangered European eel (Anguilla anguilla) remain poorly understood. One such aspect is the broad-versus narrow-head dimorphism, and how this impacts their overall performance at different stages of their life cycle. At the yellow eel stage, the phenotypes show a trophic divergence. We investigated whether pollutant accumulation is affected by this disparity. We show that broad-headed eels contained higher concentrations of mercury and several lipophilic organic pollutants, compared to narrow-headed ones, irrespective of their fat content. The hereby confirmed link between the phenotypic disparity, its associated feeding ecology and its impact on pollutant accumulation thus raises further concerns about their migratory and reproductive success. Considering that pollution is an important contributor to the European eels decline, our results demonstrate that broad-headed eels are more vulnerable to detrimental pollutant accumulation. This compromises their successful contribution to their populations reproduction and its restoration.

Diet-induced phenotypic plasticity in head morphology in European eel elvers (Anguilla anguilla): the effects of hard vs soft food

By bone remodeling and changing of muscle volume, fish can adapt to changes in mechanical loads they are confronted with, including dietary changes such as prey hardness. This capability of a genotype to develop different phenotypes in response to varying environment is known as phenotypic plasticity. Differences in prey type being consumed might trigger such a phenotypic plasticity in fish. In European eel, two morphotypes exist: broadheads and narrowheads. Studies based on gut content have shown that broadheads consume larger and harder prey, such as fish, whereas narrowheads feed on smaller prey, such as benthic invertebrates. These studies, however, are performed on yellow eels with a minimum length of 30 cm, and only provide indirect evidence that head shape is affected by diet differences. Here, we performed a feeding experiment on glass eels that just swam up the European rivers to start feeding. These glass eels were captured and separated in three groups: one group was given hard feed requiring biting, the second group got soft feed that could be sucked in and the final group, which acted as a control group, was given a mixture of both. We found that hard feeders developed a broader general head width and postorbital region than soft feeders. This region is associated with the location of the jaw muscles, indicating that hard feeders develop larger muscles to cope with the harder prey. Hard feeders, however, also grew more slowly than soft feeders, suggesting that net energy uptake of hard feeders was lower as prey handling required more energy and time. Specimens of the control group, finally, developed intermediate head widths, implying that they are not fully adapted to feed on either hard or soft prey. In conclusion, this study provides the first direct evidence that diet influences the head shape of European eel.