| |
Unimodal head-width distribution of the European eel (Anguilla anguilla L.) from the Zeeschelde does not support disruptive selection
Verhelst, P.; De Meyer, J.; Reubens, J.; Coeck, J.; Goethals, P.; Moens, T.; Mouton, A.M. (2018). Unimodal head-width distribution of the European eel (Anguilla anguilla L.) from the Zeeschelde does not support disruptive selection. PeerJ 6: e5773. https://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.5773
Additional data:
In: PeerJ. PeerJ: Corte Madera & London. ISSN 2167-8359; e-ISSN 2167-8359
Related to:Verhelst, P. (2018). Unimodal head-width distribution of the European eel ( Anguilla anguilla L.) from the Zeeschelde does not support disruptive selection, in: Verhelst, P. European eel (Anguilla anguilla L.) movement behaviour in relation to habitat fragmentation - Novel insights inferred from acoustic telemetry. pp. 115-142, more
|   |
| Keywords |
Measurement > Telemetry
Speed
Anguilla anguilla (Linnaeus, 1758) [WoRMS]
|
| Author keywords |
Maturation stages; Head dimorphism; Disruptive selection; Condition; European eel; Unimodality; Bimodality |
| Authors | | Top |
- Verhelst, P.
- De Meyer, J.
- Reubens, J.
- Coeck, J.
|
- Goethals, P.
- Moens, T.
- Mouton, A.M.
|
|
| Abstract |
Since the early 20th century, European eels (Anguilla anguilla L.) have been dichotomously classified into `narrow' and `broad' heads. These morphs are mainly considered the result of a differential food choice, with narrow heads feeding primarily on small/soft prey and broad heads on large/hard prey. Yet, such a classification implies that head-width variation follows a bimodal distribution, leading to the assumption of disruptive selection. We investigated the head morphology of 272 eels, caught over three consecutive years (2015-2017) at a single location in the Zeeschelde (Belgium). Based on our results, BIC favored a unimodal distribution, while AIC provided equal support for a unimodal and a bimodal distribution. Notably, visualization of the distributions revealed a strong overlap between the two normal distributions under the bimodal model, likely explaining the ambiguity under AIC. Consequently, it is more likely that head-width variation followed a unimodal distribution, indicating there are no disruptive selection pressures for bimodality in the Zeeschelde. As such, eels could not be divided in two distinct head-width groups. Instead, their head widths showed a continuum of narrow to broad with a normal distribution. This pattern was consistent across all maturation stages studied here. |
|
