Sustained costs of growth and the trajectory of recovery

Abstract

Summary1. Large body size is associated with many fitness advantages. Despite this, most species do not grow at their physiological maximum, suggesting costs to rapid growth. There are now many empirical examples of trade-offs with growth. 2. Despite the ubiquity of physiological delays, few studies have evaluated the duration over which growth costs occur. To address this question, we measured swimming ability in growthmanipulated Atlantic silversides (Menidia menidia). Fish were manipulated to grow at their maximum for 2 weeks and then were put on restricted rations, so they grew slowly. We then compared swimming ability with fish that had always grown slowly. 3. Fast-grown fish had significantly poorer swimming ability and continued to show a prolonged cost of this early period of rapid growth. We found that fish fully recovered normal swimming ability after~1 month of growing slowly. Most surprisingly, the trajectory of recovery was not monotonic; performance actually decreased before it improved. 4. We conclude with a suggestion to develop a better understanding of the mechanisms linking growth to performance trade-offs. Our results suggest that reduced swimming performance following fast growth is unlikely to be completely explained by bioenergetic constraints. Additionally, there is need for more nuanced life-history theory that incorporates prolonged growth costs to increase accuracy of growth rate prediction.

Oxidative stress mediates rapid compensatory growth and its costs

“…Stoks et al., 2006) and reduced mass‐corrected escape speed (e.g. Perez & Munch, 2015). The observed costs likely have fitness implications for damselflies.…”

“…We expected transient starvation to result in a compensatory growth response when food is abundant again (De Block & Stoks, 2008) and this to be associated with increases in metabolic rate (De Block, Slos, Johansson, & Stoks, 2008; Tian, Fang, & Dong, 2010) and oxidative stress (Costantini et al., 2018). As costs, we expected a lower energy storage (Morgan & Metcalfe, 2001; Stoks, De Block, & McPeek, 2006) and a lower escape speed (Perez & Munch, 2015). Under the hypotheses that both the ability to show a compensatory growth response and its costs are mediated by oxidative stress (Smith et al., 2016), we expected animals exposed to the ROS reducing agent to show a stronger compensatory growth response, with no or lower costs.…”

Dietary electrolyte balance affects growth performance, amylase activity and metabolic response in the meagre (Argyrosomus regius)

“…Alterations in DEB can trigger mechanisms to counteract an acidbase imbalance, such as gastro-intestinal tract (GIT) acid-base secretion and gill base secretion. These processes operate to reestablish acid-base homeostasis at the expense of an extra energy cost, which could otherwise be allocated to somatic growth (Perez and Munch, 2015). Therefore, acid-base homeostasis may impact fish fitness and growth (Boeuf, 1993;Boeuf and Payan, 2001;Wood and Marshall, 1994).…”

Compensatory growth offsets poor condition in native trout populations

“…Rapid growth in fishes can have short-term consequences, including developmental and maintenance restrictions (Arendt, 1997). At longer time scales, rapid growth can limit an individual's physiological capabilities (Perez & Munch, 2015), survival (Inness & Metcalfe, 2008;Johnsson & Bohlin, 2006), fecundity (Auer, Arendt, Chandramouli, & Reznick, 2010), and lifespan (Lee, Monaghan, & Metcalfe, 2013). The widespread occurrence of rapid growth in many taxonomic groups (Hector & Nakagawa, 2012) may ultimately suggest dire consequences of prolonged periods of poor growth (i.e.…”