Are the taste preferences similar in closely related fish of the same trophic category? A case of Nile and Mozambique tilapias
Species specificity of taste preferences supposes the ability of fish to consume food with particular taste and thus minimize feeding competition while sympatry. However, the problem of the extent to which taste preferences can be related to trophic category and phylogeny of fish has not been yet re...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Reviews in fish biology and fisheries 2023-12, Vol.33 (4), p.1371-1386 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 1386 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 4 |
| container_start_page | 1371 |
| container_title | Reviews in fish biology and fisheries |
| container_volume | 33 |
| creator | Kasumyan, Alexander Levina, Alexandra |
| description | Species specificity of taste preferences supposes the ability of fish to consume food with particular taste and thus minimize feeding competition while sympatry. However, the problem of the extent to which taste preferences can be related to trophic category and phylogeny of fish has not been yet resolved. We evaluated the taste preferences in Mozambique tilapia
Oreochromis mossambicus
for 37 substances (amino acids, sugars, basic taste substances) that we used earlier in experiments with the Nile tilapia
O. niloticus
. In
O. mossambicus,
taste attractive substances are the least numerous (4) and substances with an indifferent taste predominate (25). In
O. niloticus
, the numbers of taste attractive and indifferent substances are nearly equal (20 and 17), while substances with repulsive taste were not found. The difference between these facultative phytophagous fish is most noticeable for sugars palatability: in
O. mossambicus
none of the sugars have attractive taste, and 6 of them evoke aversive responses. In opposite, 9 of sugars have attractive taste, while others are indifferent, and none of sugars decrease ingestion of flavoured agar pellets in
O. niloticus
. Nevertheless, many substances are arranged in a similar order in the rows ranked by palatability for these fish. The patterns of feeding behavior are almost the same in tilapias. The study highlights that the phylogenetic proximity and similarity in the trophic category does not lead to the similarity of fish taste preferences. Most probably, feeding competition in the historical past is the main force that triggers the divergence in fish taste system functionality.
Graphical abstract |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s11160-023-09763-w |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2870575142</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2870575142</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c319t-4fb2ea6480d6feaf4f6a27c17f792c526fdf3109e48341d15d96d211b81b6ffa3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE9LwzAYh4MoOKdfwFPAczVv0ibtScbwH0y96DmkabJltE1NOsY8-NnNnODNQ3gD7-_5vfAgdAnkGggRNxEAOMkIZRmpBGfZ9ghNoBAsK6DMj9GEVGnNgPNTdBbjmpCEFXyCvmbB4HGVnoqjwUMw1gTTaxNxdJ1rVcCux7r10bQ7HEyrRtNg6-IKe_sDRtUlOvhh5TTWab30YXeLZ-kfzT704lqDVd_gZ_-putp9bFI-NQ9OxXN0YlUbzcXvnKL3-7u3-WO2eH14ms8WmWZQjVlua2oUz0vScGuUzS1XVGgQVlRUF5TbxjIglclLlkMDRVPxhgLUJdTcWsWm6OrQOwSf7sdRrv0m9OmkpKUghSggpylFDykdfIxJhRyC61TYSSBy71kePMvkWf54ltsEsQMUU7hfmvBX_Q_1DZg7gkk</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2870575142</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Are the taste preferences similar in closely related fish of the same trophic category? A case of Nile and Mozambique tilapias</title><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Kasumyan, Alexander ; Levina, Alexandra</creator><creatorcontrib>Kasumyan, Alexander ; Levina, Alexandra</creatorcontrib><description>Species specificity of taste preferences supposes the ability of fish to consume food with particular taste and thus minimize feeding competition while sympatry. However, the problem of the extent to which taste preferences can be related to trophic category and phylogeny of fish has not been yet resolved. We evaluated the taste preferences in Mozambique tilapia
Oreochromis mossambicus
for 37 substances (amino acids, sugars, basic taste substances) that we used earlier in experiments with the Nile tilapia
O. niloticus
. In
O. mossambicus,
taste attractive substances are the least numerous (4) and substances with an indifferent taste predominate (25). In
O. niloticus
, the numbers of taste attractive and indifferent substances are nearly equal (20 and 17), while substances with repulsive taste were not found. The difference between these facultative phytophagous fish is most noticeable for sugars palatability: in
O. mossambicus
none of the sugars have attractive taste, and 6 of them evoke aversive responses. In opposite, 9 of sugars have attractive taste, while others are indifferent, and none of sugars decrease ingestion of flavoured agar pellets in
O. niloticus
. Nevertheless, many substances are arranged in a similar order in the rows ranked by palatability for these fish. The patterns of feeding behavior are almost the same in tilapias. The study highlights that the phylogenetic proximity and similarity in the trophic category does not lead to the similarity of fish taste preferences. Most probably, feeding competition in the historical past is the main force that triggers the divergence in fish taste system functionality.
Graphical abstract</description><identifier>ISSN: 0960-3166</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-5184</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11160-023-09763-w</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cham: Springer International Publishing</publisher><subject>Amino acids ; Biomedical and Life Sciences ; Feeding behavior ; Feeding habits ; Fish ; Flavour ; Freshwater & Marine Ecology ; Ingestion ; Life Sciences ; Oreochromis mossambicus ; Original Research ; Palatability ; Phylogenetics ; Phylogeny ; Similarity ; Specificity ; Sugar ; Sympatry ; Taste ; Taste preferences ; Tilapia ; Whitefish ; Zoology</subject><ispartof>Reviews in fish biology and fisheries, 2023-12, Vol.33 (4), p.1371-1386</ispartof><rights>The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c319t-4fb2ea6480d6feaf4f6a27c17f792c526fdf3109e48341d15d96d211b81b6ffa3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c319t-4fb2ea6480d6feaf4f6a27c17f792c526fdf3109e48341d15d96d211b81b6ffa3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-4931-8787 ; 0000-0002-8071-792X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11160-023-09763-w$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11160-023-09763-w$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,41488,42557,51319</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kasumyan, Alexander</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Levina, Alexandra</creatorcontrib><title>Are the taste preferences similar in closely related fish of the same trophic category? A case of Nile and Mozambique tilapias</title><title>Reviews in fish biology and fisheries</title><addtitle>Rev Fish Biol Fisheries</addtitle><description>Species specificity of taste preferences supposes the ability of fish to consume food with particular taste and thus minimize feeding competition while sympatry. However, the problem of the extent to which taste preferences can be related to trophic category and phylogeny of fish has not been yet resolved. We evaluated the taste preferences in Mozambique tilapia
Oreochromis mossambicus
for 37 substances (amino acids, sugars, basic taste substances) that we used earlier in experiments with the Nile tilapia
O. niloticus
. In
O. mossambicus,
taste attractive substances are the least numerous (4) and substances with an indifferent taste predominate (25). In
O. niloticus
, the numbers of taste attractive and indifferent substances are nearly equal (20 and 17), while substances with repulsive taste were not found. The difference between these facultative phytophagous fish is most noticeable for sugars palatability: in
O. mossambicus
none of the sugars have attractive taste, and 6 of them evoke aversive responses. In opposite, 9 of sugars have attractive taste, while others are indifferent, and none of sugars decrease ingestion of flavoured agar pellets in
O. niloticus
. Nevertheless, many substances are arranged in a similar order in the rows ranked by palatability for these fish. The patterns of feeding behavior are almost the same in tilapias. The study highlights that the phylogenetic proximity and similarity in the trophic category does not lead to the similarity of fish taste preferences. Most probably, feeding competition in the historical past is the main force that triggers the divergence in fish taste system functionality.
Graphical abstract</description><subject>Amino acids</subject><subject>Biomedical and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Feeding behavior</subject><subject>Feeding habits</subject><subject>Fish</subject><subject>Flavour</subject><subject>Freshwater & Marine Ecology</subject><subject>Ingestion</subject><subject>Life Sciences</subject><subject>Oreochromis mossambicus</subject><subject>Original Research</subject><subject>Palatability</subject><subject>Phylogenetics</subject><subject>Phylogeny</subject><subject>Similarity</subject><subject>Specificity</subject><subject>Sugar</subject><subject>Sympatry</subject><subject>Taste</subject><subject>Taste preferences</subject><subject>Tilapia</subject><subject>Whitefish</subject><subject>Zoology</subject><issn>0960-3166</issn><issn>1573-5184</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE9LwzAYh4MoOKdfwFPAczVv0ibtScbwH0y96DmkabJltE1NOsY8-NnNnODNQ3gD7-_5vfAgdAnkGggRNxEAOMkIZRmpBGfZ9ghNoBAsK6DMj9GEVGnNgPNTdBbjmpCEFXyCvmbB4HGVnoqjwUMw1gTTaxNxdJ1rVcCux7r10bQ7HEyrRtNg6-IKe_sDRtUlOvhh5TTWab30YXeLZ-kfzT704lqDVd_gZ_-putp9bFI-NQ9OxXN0YlUbzcXvnKL3-7u3-WO2eH14ms8WmWZQjVlua2oUz0vScGuUzS1XVGgQVlRUF5TbxjIglclLlkMDRVPxhgLUJdTcWsWm6OrQOwSf7sdRrv0m9OmkpKUghSggpylFDykdfIxJhRyC61TYSSBy71kePMvkWf54ltsEsQMUU7hfmvBX_Q_1DZg7gkk</recordid><startdate>20231201</startdate><enddate>20231201</enddate><creator>Kasumyan, Alexander</creator><creator>Levina, Alexandra</creator><general>Springer International Publishing</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7TN</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>88A</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H95</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>H98</scope><scope>H99</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>L.F</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4931-8787</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8071-792X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20231201</creationdate><title>Are the taste preferences similar in closely related fish of the same trophic category? A case of Nile and Mozambique tilapias</title><author>Kasumyan, Alexander ; Levina, Alexandra</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c319t-4fb2ea6480d6feaf4f6a27c17f792c526fdf3109e48341d15d96d211b81b6ffa3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Amino acids</topic><topic>Biomedical and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Feeding behavior</topic><topic>Feeding habits</topic><topic>Fish</topic><topic>Flavour</topic><topic>Freshwater & Marine Ecology</topic><topic>Ingestion</topic><topic>Life Sciences</topic><topic>Oreochromis mossambicus</topic><topic>Original Research</topic><topic>Palatability</topic><topic>Phylogenetics</topic><topic>Phylogeny</topic><topic>Similarity</topic><topic>Specificity</topic><topic>Sugar</topic><topic>Sympatry</topic><topic>Taste</topic><topic>Taste preferences</topic><topic>Tilapia</topic><topic>Whitefish</topic><topic>Zoology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kasumyan, Alexander</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Levina, Alexandra</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Oceanic Abstracts</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Biology Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 1: Biological Sciences & Living Resources</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy & Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Aquaculture Abstracts</collection><collection>ASFA: Marine Biotechnology Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Marine Biotechnology Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Reviews in fish biology and fisheries</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kasumyan, Alexander</au><au>Levina, Alexandra</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Are the taste preferences similar in closely related fish of the same trophic category? A case of Nile and Mozambique tilapias</atitle><jtitle>Reviews in fish biology and fisheries</jtitle><stitle>Rev Fish Biol Fisheries</stitle><date>2023-12-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>33</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>1371</spage><epage>1386</epage><pages>1371-1386</pages><issn>0960-3166</issn><eissn>1573-5184</eissn><abstract>Species specificity of taste preferences supposes the ability of fish to consume food with particular taste and thus minimize feeding competition while sympatry. However, the problem of the extent to which taste preferences can be related to trophic category and phylogeny of fish has not been yet resolved. We evaluated the taste preferences in Mozambique tilapia
Oreochromis mossambicus
for 37 substances (amino acids, sugars, basic taste substances) that we used earlier in experiments with the Nile tilapia
O. niloticus
. In
O. mossambicus,
taste attractive substances are the least numerous (4) and substances with an indifferent taste predominate (25). In
O. niloticus
, the numbers of taste attractive and indifferent substances are nearly equal (20 and 17), while substances with repulsive taste were not found. The difference between these facultative phytophagous fish is most noticeable for sugars palatability: in
O. mossambicus
none of the sugars have attractive taste, and 6 of them evoke aversive responses. In opposite, 9 of sugars have attractive taste, while others are indifferent, and none of sugars decrease ingestion of flavoured agar pellets in
O. niloticus
. Nevertheless, many substances are arranged in a similar order in the rows ranked by palatability for these fish. The patterns of feeding behavior are almost the same in tilapias. The study highlights that the phylogenetic proximity and similarity in the trophic category does not lead to the similarity of fish taste preferences. Most probably, feeding competition in the historical past is the main force that triggers the divergence in fish taste system functionality.
Graphical abstract</abstract><cop>Cham</cop><pub>Springer International Publishing</pub><doi>10.1007/s11160-023-09763-w</doi><tpages>16</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4931-8787</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8071-792X</orcidid></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0960-3166 |
| ispartof | Reviews in fish biology and fisheries, 2023-12, Vol.33 (4), p.1371-1386 |
| issn | 0960-3166 1573-5184 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2870575142 |
| source | SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
| subjects | Amino acids Biomedical and Life Sciences Feeding behavior Feeding habits Fish Flavour Freshwater & Marine Ecology Ingestion Life Sciences Oreochromis mossambicus Original Research Palatability Phylogenetics Phylogeny Similarity Specificity Sugar Sympatry Taste Taste preferences Tilapia Whitefish Zoology |
| title | Are the taste preferences similar in closely related fish of the same trophic category? A case of Nile and Mozambique tilapias |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-04T18%3A05%3A17IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Are%20the%20taste%20preferences%20similar%20in%20closely%20related%20fish%20of%20the%20same%20trophic%20category?%20A%20case%20of%20Nile%20and%20Mozambique%20tilapias&rft.jtitle=Reviews%20in%20fish%20biology%20and%20fisheries&rft.au=Kasumyan,%20Alexander&rft.date=2023-12-01&rft.volume=33&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=1371&rft.epage=1386&rft.pages=1371-1386&rft.issn=0960-3166&rft.eissn=1573-5184&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11160-023-09763-w&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2870575142%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2870575142&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |