Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-16T01:19:43.342Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Visual pigments of Baltic Sea fishes of marine and limnic origin

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 September 2007

MIRKA JOKELA-MÄÄTTÄ ,
TEEMU SMURA ,
ANNA AALTONEN ,
PETRI ALA-LAURILA  and
KRISTIAN DONNER
MIRKA JOKELA-MÄÄTTÄ
Affiliation:
Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
TEEMU SMURA
Affiliation:
Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
ANNA AALTONEN
Affiliation:
Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
PETRI ALA-LAURILA
Affiliation:
Department of Physiology and Biophysics, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston Massachusetts
KRISTIAN DONNER
Affiliation:
Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Absorbance spectra of rods and some cones were measured by microspectrophotometry in 22 fish species from the brackish-water of the Baltic Sea, and when applicable, in the same species from the Atlantic Ocean (3 spp.), the Mediterranean Sea (1 sp.), or Finnish fresh-water lakes (9 spp.). The main purpose was to study whether there were differences suggesting spectral adaptation of rod vision to different photic environments during the short history (<104 years) of postglacial isolation of the Baltic Sea and the Finnish lakes. Rod absorbance spectra of the Baltic subspecies/populations of herring (Clupea harengus membras), flounder (Platichthys flesus), and sand goby (Pomatoschistus minutus) were all long-wavelength-shifted (9.8, 1.9, and 5.3 nm, respectively, at the wavelength of maximum absorbance, λmax) compared with their truly marine counterparts, consistent with adaptation for improved quantum catch, and improved signal-to-noise ratio of vision in the Baltic light environment. Judged by the shape of the spectra, the chromophore was pure A1 in all these cases; hence the differences indicate evolutionary tuning of the opsin. In no species of fresh-water origin did we find significant opsin-based spectral shifts specific to the Baltic populations, only spectral differences due to varying A1/A2 chromophore ratio in some. For most species, rod λmax fell within a wavelength range consistent with high signal-to-noise ratio of vision in the spectral conditions prevailing at depths where light becomes scarce in the respective waters. Exceptions were sandeels in the Baltic Sea, which are active only in bright light, and all species in a “brown” lake, where rod λmax lay far below the theoretically optimal range.

Keywords

MicrospectrophotometryAbsorbance spectraQuantum catchRodSignal-to-noise ratio
Type
Research Article
Information
Visual Neuroscience , Volume 24 , Issue 3 , May 2007 , pp. 389 - 398
Copyright
© 2007 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Ala-Laurila, P., Albert, R-J., Saarinen, P., Koskelainen, A. & Donner, K. (2003). The thermal contribution to photoactivation in A2 visual pigments studied by temperature effects on spectral properties. Visual Neuroscience 20, 411–419.Google Scholar
Ala-Laurila, P., Donner, K. & Koskelainen, A. (2004b). Thermal activation and photoactivation of visual pigments. Biophysical Journal 86, 3653–3662.Google Scholar
Ala-Laurila, P., Pahlberg, J., Koskelainen, A. & Donner, K. (2004a). On the relation between the photoactivation energy and the absorbance spectrum of visual pigments. Vision Research 44, 2153–2158.Google Scholar
Ala-Laurila, P., Saarinen, P., Albert, R., Koskelainen, A. & Donner, K. (2002). Temperature effects on spectral properties of red and green rods in toad retina. Visual Neuroscience 19, 781–792.Google Scholar
Ali, M.A. & Wagner, H.J. (1975). Visual pigments: Phylogeny and ecology. In Vision in fishes. New Approaches in Research, ed. Ali, M.A., pp. 481–516. New York: Plenum Press.
Allen, D.M. & McFarland, W.N. (1972). Effect of temperature on rhodopsin-porphyropsin ratios in a fish. Vision Research 13, 1303–1309.Google Scholar
Barlow, H.B. (1957). Purkinje shift and retinal noise. Nature 179, 255–256.Google Scholar
Baylor, D.A., Matthews, G. & Yau, K.W. (1980). Two components of electrical dark noise in toad retinal rod outer segments. Journal of Physiology 309, 591–621.Google Scholar
Blaxter, J.H.S. (1964). Spectral sensitivity of the herring Clupea harengus L. The Journal of Experimental Biology 41, 155–162.Google Scholar
Bowmaker, J.K., Dartnall, H.J.A. & Herring, P.J. (1988). Longwave-sensitive visual pigments in some deep-sea fishes: Segregation of “paired” rhodopsins and porphyropsins. Journal of Comparative Physiology A 163, 685–698.Google Scholar
Britt, L.L., Loew, E.R. & McFarland, W.N. (2001). Visual pigments in the early life stages of Pacific northwest marine fishes. The Journal of Experimental Biology 204, 2581–2587.Google Scholar
Collette, B.B. (1977). Systematics and Zoogeography of the fishes of the family Percidae. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 34, 1450–1463.Google Scholar
Cooper, J.A. & Chapleau, F. (1998). Monophyly and intrarelationships of the family Pleuronectidae (Pleuronectiformes), with a revised classification. Fishery Bulletin 96, 686–726.Google Scholar
Dartnall, H.J.A. & Lythgoe, J.N. (1965). The spectral clustering of visual pigments. Vision Research 5, 81–100.Google Scholar
Dartnall, H.J.A. (1972). Photosensitivity. In Handbook of Sensory Physiology VII/: Photochemistry of Vision, ed. Dartnall, H.J.A., pp. 122–145. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Dartnall, H.J.A., Lander, M.R. & Munz, F.W. (1961). Periodic changes in the visual pigment of a fish. In Progress in Photobiology, eds. Christensen, B. & Buchmann, B., pp. 203–213. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Donner, K., Firsov, M.L. & Govardovskii, V.I. (1990). The frequency of isomerization-like”dark” events in rhodopsin and porphyropsin rods of the bull-frog retina. Journal of Physiology 428, 673–692.Google Scholar
Engström, K. (1963). Cone types and cone arrangement in teleost retina. Acta Zoologica 44, 179–243.Google Scholar
Firsov, M.L., Govardovskii, V.I. & Donner, K. (1994). Response univariance in bull-frog rods with two visual pigments. Vision Research 34, 839–847.Google Scholar
Govardovskii, V.I., Fyhrquist, N., Reuter, T., Kuzmin, D.G. & Donner, K. (2000). In search of the visual pigment template. Visual Neuroscience 17, 509–528.Google Scholar
Hárosi, F.I. (1994). An analysis of two spectral properties of vertebrate visual pigments. Vision Research 34, 1359–1367.Google Scholar
Jerlov, N.G. (1968). Optical Oceanography. London: Elsevier.
Jokela, M., Vartio, A., Paulin, L., Fyhrquist-Vanni, N. & Donner, K. (2003). Polymorphism of the rod visual pigment between allopatric populations of the sand goby (Pomatoschistus minutus): A microspectrophotometric study. The Journal of Experimental Biology 206, 2611–2617.Google Scholar
Kefalov, V., Fu, Y., Marsh-Armstrong, N. & Yau, K.-W. (2003). Role of visual pigment properties in rod and cone phototransduction. Nature 425, 526–531.Google Scholar
Liebman, P.A. & Entine, G. (1968). Visual pigments of frog and tadpole. Vision Research 8, 761–775.Google Scholar
Lindström, M. (2000). Eye function of Mysidacea (Crustacea) in the northern Baltic Sea. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 246, 85–101.Google Scholar
Loew, E.R. & Lythgoe, J.N. (1978). The ecology of cone pigments in teleost fishes. Vision Research 18, 715–722.Google Scholar
Lythgoe, J.N. (1979). The Ecology of Vision. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
MacNichol, E.F.Jr. (1986). A unifying presentation of photopigment spectra. Vision Research 26, 1543–1556.Google Scholar
Pahlberg, J., Lindström, M., Ala-Laurila, P., Fyhrquist-Vanni, N., Koskelainen, A. & Donner, K. (2005). The photoactivation energy of the visual pigment in two spectrally different populations of Mysis relicta (Crustacea, Mysida). Journal of Comparative Physiology A 191, 837–844.Google Scholar
Parmanne, R. & Sjöblom, V. (1984). Sillikalat. In Suomen eläimet, ed. Koli, L., pp. 80–97. Espoo: Weilin+Göös (In Finnish).
Parry, J.W.L., Peirson, S.N., Wilkens, H. & Bowmaker, J.K. (2003). Multiple photopigments from the Mexican blind cavefish, Astyanax fasciatus: a microspectrophotometric study. Vision Research 43, 31–41.Google Scholar
Shand, J., Hart, N.S., Thomas, N. & Partridge, J.C. (2002). Developmental changes in the cone visual pigment of black bream Acanthopagrus butcheri. Journal of Experimental Biology 205, 3661–3667.Google Scholar
Tsin, A.T.C. & Beatty, D.D. (1980). Visual pigments and vitamins A in the adult bullfrog. Experimental Eye Research 30, 143–153.Google Scholar
Whitehead, P.J.P., Nelson, G.J. & Wongratana, T. (1988). Chirocentridae, Clupeidae and Pristigasteridae. FAO species catalogue. Vol. 7. Clupeoid fishes of the world (Suborder Clupeoidei): An annotated and illustrated catalogue of the herrings, sardines pilchards, sprats, shads, anchovies and wolfherrings (FAO Fisheries Synopsis) pp. 305–379. The Stationery Office Books.
Winslade, P. (1974). Behavioural studies on the lesser sandeel Ammodytes marinus (Raitt) II. The effect of light intensity on activity. Journal of Fish Biology 6, 577–586.Google Scholar