Hypoxia-induced developmental plasticity of larval growth, gill and labyrinth organ morphometrics in two anabantoid fish: The facultative air-breather Siamese fighting fish (Betta splendens) and the obligate air-breather the blue gourami (Trichopodus trichopterus)

Larval and juvenile air breathing fish may experience nocturnal and/or seasonal aquatic hypoxia. Yet, whether hypoxia induces respiratory developmental plasticity in larval air breathing fish is uncertain. This study predicted that larvae of two closely related anabantid fish-the facultative air breather the Siamese fighting fish (Betta splendens) and the obligate air breathing blue gourami (Trichopodus trichopterus)-show distinct differences in developmental changes in body, gill, and labyrinth morphology because of their differences in levels of dependency upon air breathing and habitat. Larval populations of both species were reared in normoxia or chronic nocturnal hypoxia from hatching through 35-38 days postfertilization. Gill and labyrinth variables were measured at the onset of air breathing. Betta splendens reared in normoxia possessed larger, more developed gills (similar to 3x greater area) than T. trichopterus at comparable stages. Surface area of the emerging labyrinth, the air breathing organ, was similar to 85% larger in normoxic B. splendens compared to T. trichopterus. Rearing in mild hypoxia stimulated body growth in B. splendens, but neither mild nor severe hypoxia affected growth in T. trichopterus. Condition factor, K (similar to 1.3 in B. splendens, 0.7 in T. trichopterus) was unaffected by mild hypoxia in either species, but was reduced by severe hypoxia to B. splendens. Severe, but not mild, hypoxia decreased branchial surface area in B. splendens by similar to 40%, but neither hypoxia level affected Trichopodus branchial surface. Mild, but not severe, hypoxia increased labyrinth surface area by 30% in B. splendens. However, as for branchial surface area, labyrinth surface area was not affected in Trichopodus. These differential larval responses to hypoxic rearing suggest that different larval habitats and activity levels are greater factors influencing developmental plasticity than genetic closeness of the two species.