Discrimination among Populations of Sockeye Salmon Fry with Fourier Analysis of Otolith Banding Patterns Formed during Incubation

Abstract We used otolith banding patterns formed during incubation to discriminate among hatchery- and wild-incubated fry of sockeye salmon Oncorhynchus nerka from Tustumena Lake, Alaska. Fourier analysis of otolith luminance profiles was used to describe banding patterns; the amplitudes of individual Fourier harmonics were discriminant variables. Correct classification of otoliths to either hatchery or wild origin was 83.1 % (cross-validation) and 72.7% (test data) with the use of quadratic discriminant function analysis on 10 Fourier amplitudes. Overall classification rates among the six test groups (one hatchery and five wild groups) were 46.5% (cross-validation) and 39.3% (test data) with the use of linear discriminant function analysis on 16 Fourier amplitudes. Although classification rates for wild-incubated fry from any one site never exceeded 67% (cross-validation) or 60% (test data), location-specific information was evident for all groups because the probability of classifying an individual to i...

[1]  S. Marshall,et al.  Pattern identification in the microstructure of sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) otoliths , 1982 .

[2]  G. Pannella.  Growth Patterns in Fish Sagittae , 1980 .

[3]  New method of quantifying scale shape and an application to stock identification in walleye (Stizostedion vitreum vitreum) , 1978 .

[4]  T. Quinn,et al.  Homing and spawning site selection by sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) in Iliamna Lake, Alaska , 1991 .

[5]  H. Horton,et al.  Development of Steelhead Trout (Salmo gairdneri) Otoliths and Their Use for Age Analysis and for Separating Summer from Winter Races and Wild from Hatchery Stocks , 1974 .

[6]  K. Wilson,et al.  Relationship Between Thickness of Daily Growth Increments in Sagittae and Change in Body Weight of Sockeye Salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) Fry , 1982 .

[7]  F. Allendorf,et al.  Conservation and Genetics of Salmonid Fishes , 1996 .

[8]  L. Nielsen.  Methods of Marking Fish and Shellfish , 1992 .

[9]  D. Checkley,et al.  Comparisons of herring otoliths using Fourier series shape analysis , 1986 .

[10]  J. Neilson,et al.  Estuarine Growth of Juvenile Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) as Inferred from Otolith Microstructure , 1985 .

[11]  S. Campana,et al.  Stock Discrimination Using Otolith Shape Analysis , 1993 .

[12]  Use of Daily Growth Increments on Otoliths to Assess Stockings of Hatchery‐Reared Kokanees , 1992 .

[13]  G. McLachlan.  Discriminant Analysis and Statistical Pattern Recognition , 1992 .

[14]  Hiram W. Li,et al.  Variation in Mitochondrial DNA and Allozymes Discriminates Early and Late Forms of Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) in the Kenai and Kasilof Rivers, Alaska , 1994 .

[15]  C. Simenstad,et al.  Relationship between Otolith Microstructure and the Growth of Juvenile Chum Salmon (Oncorhynchus keta) under Different Prey Rations , 1984 .

[16]  K. Friedland,et al.  Use of Otolith Morphology in Stock Discriminations of Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar) , 1994 .

[17]  Byron K. Williams,et al.  Assessment of sampling stability in ecological applications of discriminant analysis , 1988 .

[18]  T. Mulligan,et al.  A method of stock identification based on the elemental composition of striped bass Morone saxatilis (Walbaum) otoliths , 1988 .

[19]  R. Carline,et al.  Evaluation of Scale Shape for the Identification of Walleye Stocks from Western Lake Erie , 1982 .

[20]  M. L. Hendricks,et al.  Use of Otolith Microstructure to Distinguish Wild from Hatchery-Reared American Shad in the Susquehanna River , 1994 .

[21]  E. Taylor.  A review of local adaptation in Salmonidac, with particular reference to Pacific and Atlantic salmon , 1991 .

[22]  J. Casselman,et al.  Lake Whitefish (Coregonus clupeaformis) Stocks of the Ontario Waters of Lake Huron , 1981 .

[23]  S. Campana,et al.  Microstructure of Fish Otoliths , 1985 .

[24]  G. Pannella.  Fish Otoliths: Daily Growth Layers and Periodical Patterns , 1971, Science.

[25]  Gary E. Lord,et al.  IDENTIFICATION OF STOCKS OF BRISTOL BAY SOCKEYE SALMON, ONCORHYNCHUSNERKA, BY EVALUATING SCALE PATTERNS WITH A POLYNOMIAL DISCRIMINANT METHOD! , 1978 .

[26]  T. Bender,et al.  Multiple Marking of American Shad Otoliths with Tetracycline Antibiotics , 1991 .

[27]  J. Neilson,et al.  Otoliths of Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha): Daily Growth Increments and Factors Influencing Their Production , 1982 .

[28]  C. J. Huberty,et al.  Applied Discriminant Analysis , 1994 .

[29]  Pierre Gagnon,et al.  Usefulness of Fourier Analysis of Otolith Shape for Atlantic Mackerel (Scomber scombrus) Stock Discrimination , 1991 .

[30]  Richard A. Johnson,et al.  Applied Multivariate Statistical Analysis , 1983 .

[31]  J. M. McGlade,et al.  Stock Identification: Materials and Methods , 1981 .

[32]  W. W. Daniel,et al.  Applied Nonparametric Statistics , 1978 .

[33]  W. J. Spearman,et al.  Genetic Stock Structure of Western Alaska Chum Salmon and a Comparison with Russian Far East Stocks , 1994 .

[34]  L. Holland-Bartels,et al.  Pattern of Shoreline Spawning by Sockeye Salmon in a Glacially Turbid Lake: Evidence for Subpopulation Differentiation , 1995 .

[35]  B. Rieman,et al.  Use of Otolith Microchemistry to Discriminate Oncorhynchus nerka of Resident and Anadromous Origin , 1994 .

[36]  C. Burger,et al.  Genetic Differences among Populations of Alaskan Sockeye Salmon , 1985 .