Distinct intestinal microbial communities of two sympatric anadromous Arctic salmonids and the effects of migration and feeding

Although intestinal microbial communities from anadromous Arctic char (Salvelinus alpinus (Linnaeus, 1758)) in Kitikmeot, Nunavut, Canada, differ depending on the timing and location of capture, determinants of gut microbiota in other wild Arctic salmonids are largely unknown. Using high-throughput...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Arctic Science
Main Authors: Geraint Element, Katja Engel, Josh D. Neufeld, John M. Casselman, Peter J. Van Coeverden de Groot, Virginia K. Walker
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
French
Published: Canadian Science Publishing 2021
Subjects:
arctic char
lake whitefish
salvelinus alpinus
corgeonus clupeaformis
anadromous
microbiome
arctic ocean
psychrophiles
climate change
pathogens
geo
envir
Arctic
Arctic Ocean
Canada
Nunavut
Climate change
Kitikmeot
Salvelinus alpinus
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1139/as-2020-0011
https://doaj.org/article/db428a50bdb246cca1f01a3ad76c73ff
Description
Summary:Although intestinal microbial communities from anadromous Arctic char (Salvelinus alpinus (Linnaeus, 1758)) in Kitikmeot, Nunavut, Canada, differ depending on the timing and location of capture, determinants of gut microbiota in other wild Arctic salmonids are largely unknown. Using high-throughput 16S rRNA gene sequence data, we compared intestinal microbiota from Arctic char to those from a related and sympatric salmonid, lake whitefish (Coregonus clupeaformis (Mitchill, 1818)). Shifts in lake whitefish gut microbial community composition were observed between brackish water and freshwater, similar to impacts of salinity reported previously for Arctic char. Despite these similarities, gut community profiles for the two salmonids differed, with whitefish having higher diversities and increased proportions of taxa affiliated with potential pathogens. Geography seemed to have a greater impact on freshwater whitefish gut microbiota than on corresponding Arctic char. Additionally, microbiota diversity was significantly more affected by feeding behavior in whitefish compared with sympatric Arctic char. As sampled whitefish were at their northern range limits and grew slowly, we speculate that they, and their microbial consortia, could be more vulnerable to certain abiotic and biotic factors than Arctic char, which are well adapted to conditions found in these high latitude environments and have the most northern distribution of any freshwater fish.

Similar Items