No abstract

Critical thermal maximum (CTmax) is a commonly and increasingly used measure of an animal’s upper thermal tolerance limit. However, it is unknown how consistent CTmax is within an individual, and how physiologically taxing such experiments are. We addressed this by estimating the repeatability of CTmax in zebrafish, and measured how growth and survival were affected by multiple trials. The repeatability of CTmax over four trials was 0.22 (0.07–0.43). However, CTmax increased from the first to the second trial, likely because of thermal acclimation triggered by the heat shock. After this initial acclimation response individuals became more consistent in their CTmax, reflected in a higher repeatability measure of 0.45 (0.28–0.65) for trials 2–4. We found a high innate thermal tolerance led to a lower acclimation response, whereas a high acclimation response was present in individuals that displayed a low initial CTmax. This could indicate that different strategies for thermal tolerance (i.e. plasticity vs. high innate tolerance) can co-exist in a population. Additionally, repeated CTmax trials had no effect on growth, and survival was high (99%). This validates the method and, combined with the relatively high repeatability, highlights the relevance of CTmax for continued use as a metric for acute thermal tolerance.

Climate change is increasing global temperatures and intensifying the frequency and severity of extreme heat waves. How organisms will cope with these changes depends on their inherent thermal tolerance, acclimation capacity, and ability for evolutionary adaptation. Yet, the potential for adaptation of upper thermal tolerance in vertebrates is largely unknown. We artificially selected offspring from wild-caught zebrafish (Danio rerio) to increase (Up-selected) or decrease (Down-selected) upper thermal tolerance over six generations. Selection to increase upper thermal tolerance was also performed on warm-acclimated fish to test whether plasticity in the form of inducible warm tolerance also evolved. Upper thermal tolerance responded to selection in the predicted directions. However, compared to the control lines, the response was stronger in the Down-selected than in the Up-selected lines in which evolution toward higher upper thermal tolerance was slow (0.04 ± 0.008 °C per generation). Furthermore, the scope for plasticity resulting from warm acclimation decreased in the Up-selected lines. These results suggest the existence of a hard limit in upper thermal tolerance. Considering the rate at which global temperatures are increasing, the observed rates of adaptation and the possible hard limit in upper thermal tolerance suggest a low potential for evolutionary rescue in tropical fish living at the edge of their thermal limits.

No abstract

Model organisms can be useful for studying climate change impacts, but it is unclear whether domestication to laboratory conditions has altered their thermal tolerance and therefore how representative of wild populations they are. Zebrafish in the wild live in fluctuating thermal environments that potentially reach harmful temperatures. In the laboratory, zebrafish have gone through four decades of domestication and adaptation to stable optimal temperatures with few thermal extremes. If maintaining thermal tolerance is costly or if genetic traits promoting laboratory fitness at optimal temperature differ from genetic traits for high thermal tolerance, the thermal tolerance of laboratory zebrafish could be hypothesized to be lower than that of wild zebrafish. Furthermore, very little is known about the thermal environment of wild zebrafish and how close to their thermal limits they live. Here, we compared the acute upper thermal tolerance (critical thermal maxima; CTmax) of wild zebrafish measured on-site in West Bengal, India, to zebrafish at three laboratory acclimation/domestication levels: wild-caught, F1 generation wild-caught and domesticated laboratory AB-WT line. We found that in the wild, CTmax increased with increasing site temperature. Yet at the warmest site, zebrafish lived very close to their thermal limit, suggesting that they may currently encounter lethal temperatures. In the laboratory, acclimation temperature appeared to have a stronger effect on CTmax than it did in the wild. The fish in the wild also had a 0.85–1.01°C lower CTmax compared to all laboratory populations. This difference between laboratory-held and wild populations shows that environmental conditions can affect zebrafish’s thermal tolerance. However, there was no difference in CTmax between the laboratory-held populations regardless of the domestication duration. This suggests that thermal tolerance is maintained during domestication and highlights that experiments using domesticated laboratory-reared model species can be appropriate for addressing certain questions on thermal tolerance and global warming impacts.