不良研究所

Human Actions Impact Wild Salmon鈥檚 Ability to Evolve

Spring-Run Chinook鈥檚 Decline and Loss Connected to Specific Gene Variation

News
Spring-run chinook salmon
Spring-run chinook in the Salmon River. (Peter Bohler)

Once spring-run chinook salmon disappear, they are not likely to re-emerge, indicates genetic analysis of the revered wild fish in a study led by the 不良研究所. Prompt conservation action could preserve spring-run chinook, as well as their evolutionary potential.

The study, in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, illustrates that when human actions alter the characteristics, or 鈥減henotypes,鈥 of wild species, these changes can become irreversible. This can have long-term evolutionary consequences because natural phenotypic variation buffers species from environmental changes and is a fundamental prerequisite for future evolution.

鈥淚f you lose the spring-run gene, you could potentially lose spring-run chinook forever,鈥 said lead author Tasha Thompson, a 不良研究所 doctoral candidate in the lab of 不良研究所 Professor Michael R. Miller in the Department of Animal Science. 鈥淵ou can鈥檛 just assume the potential to recover them will persist in fall-run salmon populations.鈥

What makes spring-run chinook so special?

Wild chinook salmon date back millions of years in western North America. While fall-run populations are relatively abundant, spring-run chinook are on the brink of extinction in most locations where they haven鈥檛 already been lost.

Spring-run chinook are highly prized by indigenous cultures on the West Coast, where the fish figure centrally in 鈥渇irst salmon鈥 ceremonies and are treasured for their extra fatty flesh. Other fishermen and seafood-lovers seek out 鈥渟pringers鈥 for their good-eating qualities, as well. And the fish are ecologically important, delivering marine nutrients higher in the watersheds than their fall-run counterparts.

Spring-run chinook salmon
Spring-run chinook look and behave differently from fall-run chinook salmon. These are adults in California鈥檚 Salmon River. (Michael Bravo)

Historically, many rivers hosted large numbers of both spring-run and fall-run chinook. But, the study notes, 鈥渂ecause they rely on clean, cold water throughout hot summer months, spring-run chinook are more vulnerable than fall-run chinook鈥 to activities such as logging, mining, dams and water diversion, and to .

Why salmon shifted migration

To understand the importance of the spring-run gene for sustaining spring-run chinook, the authors worked in both Oregon and California. They sampled fish from rivers that still have spring-run chinook as well as rivers where spring-run chinook have already been lost.

Their first stop with was Oregon鈥檚 Rogue River, one of the few remaining locations with a significant number of wild spring-run chinook. Before a dam was constructed in 1977, most chinook entered the upper Rogue River in the spring. After the dam, spring-run chinook dramatically decreased while fall-run chinook increased. This shift in run timing corresponded with an alarming decrease in the prevalence of spring-run genes. If these trends continue, the authors鈥 research suggests the potential for complete loss of spring-run genes that are essential for producing Rogue River spring-run chinook returns.

Gold Ray Dam, Rogue River, Oregon
Gold Ray Dam along Oregon鈥檚 Rogue River, with Table Rock in the background. (Getty)

Their next stop was the upper Klamath River basin, where dams have prevented upstream salmon migrations for over a century, but where archaeological sites retain the history of salmon harvest at indigenous fishing sites across thousands of years. By sifting through DNA extracted from ancient salmon bones, the authors confirmed the historical presence of spring-run genes in upper Klamath chinook prior to the dams. Dam removal could reopen habitat suitable for spring-run chinook restoration.

The authors then sampled contemporary fish from tributaries below the Klamath dams to find potential source populations with spring-run genes that could be suitable for recolonization following dam removal. They examined if the more abundant Klamath fall-run chinook could be serving as a reservoir of spring-run genes. In the Shasta and Scott rivers, Klamath River tributaries where spring-run chinook went extinct in the 1930s and 1970s, respectively, the spring-run gene was essentially missing from the fall-run chinook. This result is especially concerning given that wild spring-run chinook are expected to be lost from the Klamath basin within 50 years.

鈥淥ut of almost one thousand fish, we found less than 1 percent carrying spring-run genes in each river,鈥 Thompson said. 鈥淭hose fall-run chinook populations cannot be considered sustainable reservoirs of spring-run genes.鈥

Not too late

With such low numbers, is it too late for spring-run chinook? Thompson doesn鈥檛 think so.

In 2021, the largest-scale dam removal in U.S. history is scheduled to begin on the Klamath River with the removal of four dams. This will open up hundreds of miles of historic chinook salmon spawning habitat.

鈥淚 definitely have hope for these fish,鈥 Thompson said. 鈥淎 lot of people care passionately for spring-run chinook. Hopefully our results will be used to focus the conservation effort for them.鈥

In addition to Thompson and Miller, the study鈥檚 co-authors include Daniel Prince and Sean O鈥橰ourke of 不良研究所, Renee Bellinger and Michael Banks of Oregon State University, Alexander Stevenson of Historical Research Associates Inc., Antonia Rodrigues and Dongya Yang of Simon Fraser University, Matthew Sloat of Wild Salmon Center, Camilla Speller of University of York, and Virginia Butler of Portland State University.

The study received funding from the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council in Canada. 

Media Resources

Kat Kerlin, News and Media Relations, 530-750-9195, kekerlin@ucdavis.edu

Tasha Thompson, Animal Science, tthompson@ucdavis.edu

Primary Category

Secondary Categories

Environment Science & Technology

Tags