Contrasting Responses to Harvesting and Environmental Drivers of Fast and Slow Life History Species

According to their main life history traits, organisms can be arranged in a continuum from fast (species with small body size, short lifespan and high fecundity) to slow (species with opposite characteristics). Life history determines the responses of organisms to natural and anthropogenic factors, as slow species are expected to be more sensitive than fast species to perturbations. Owing to their contrasting traits, cephalopods and elasmobranchs are typical examples of fast and slow strategies, respectively. We investigated the responses of these two contrasting strategies to fishing exploitation and environmental conditions (temperature, productivity and depth) using generalized additive models. Our results confirmed the foreseen contrasting responses of cephalopods and elasmobranchs to natural (environment) and anthropogenic (harvesting) influences. Even though a priori foreseen, we did expect neither the clear-cut differential responses between groups nor the homogeneous sensitivity to the same factors within the two taxonomic groups. Apart from depth, which affected both groups equally, cephalopods and elasmobranchs were exclusively affected by environmental conditions and fishing exploitation, respectively. Owing to its short, annual cycle, cephalopods do not have overlapping generations and consequently lack the buffering effects conferred by different age classes observed in multi-aged species such as elasmobranchs. We suggest that cephalopods are sensitive to short-term perturbations, such as seasonal environmental changes, because they lack this buffering effect but they are in turn not influenced by continuous, long-term moderate disturbances such as fishing because of its high population growth and turnover. The contrary would apply to elasmobranchs, whose multi-aged population structure would buffer the seasonal environmental effects, but they would display strong responses to uninterrupted harvesting due to its low population resilience. Besides providing empirical evidence to the theoretically predicted contrasting responses of cephalopods and elasmobranchs to disturbances, our results are useful for the sustainable exploitation of these resourcesVersión del editor4,411

A multi-scale analysis of bull sperm methylome revealed both species peculiarities and conserved tissue-specific

peer-reviewedBackground: Spermatozoa have a remarkable epigenome in line with their degree of specialization, their unique nature and different requirements for successful fertilization. Accordingly, perturbations in the establishment of DNA methylation patterns during male germ cell differentiation have been associated with infertility in several species.Background: Spermatozoa have a remarkable epigenResults: The quantification of DNA methylation at CCGG sites using luminometric methylation assay (LUMA) highlighted the undermethylation of bull sperm compared to the sperm of rams, stallions, mice, goats and men. Total blood cells displayed a similarly high level of methylation in bulls and rams, suggesting that undermethylation of the bovine genome was specific to sperm. Annotation of CCGG sites in different species revealed no striking bias in the distribution of genome features targeted by LUMA that could explain undermethylation of bull sperm. To map DNA methylation at a genome-wide scale, bull sperm was compared with bovine liver, fibroblasts and monocytes using reduced representation bisulfite sequencing (RRBS) and immunoprecipitation of methylated DNA followed by microarray hybridization (MeDIP-chip). These two methods exhibited differences in terms of genome coverage, and consistently, two independent sets of sequences differentially methylated in sperm and somatic cells were identified for RRBS and MeDIP-chip. Remarkably, in the two sets most of the differentially methylated sequences were hypomethylated in sperm. In agreement with previous studies in other species, the sequences that were specifically hypomethylated in bull sperm targeted processes relevant to the germline differentiation program (piRNA metabolism, meiosis, spermatogenesis) and sperm functions (cell adhesion, fertilization), as well as satellites and rDNA repeats. Conclusions: These results highlight the undermethylation of bull spermatozoa when compared with both bovine somatic cells and the sperm of other mammals, and raise questions regarding the dynamics of DNA methylation in bovine male germline. Whether sperm undermethylation has potential interactions with structural variation in the cattle genome may deserve further attention. While bull semen is widely used in artificial insemination, the literature describing DNA methylation in bull spermatozoa is still scarce. The purpose of this study was therefore to characterize the bull sperm methylome relative to both bovine somatic cells and the sperm of other mammals through a multiscale analysis