Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …


12 Issues per year

IMPACT FACTOR 2016: 0.759
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 0.803

CiteScore 2016: 0.85

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2016: 0.300
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2016: 0.476

See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 67, Issue 4 (Aug 2012)


Hybridization between Cottus gobio and Cottus poecilopus in the Odra River drainage basin (Czech Republic)

Eva Marešová
  • Institute of Vertebrate Biology, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, v.v.i., Květná 8, CZ-60365, Brno, Czech Republic
  • Email:
/ Věra Lusková
  • Institute of Vertebrate Biology, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, v.v.i., Květná 8, CZ-60365, Brno, Czech Republic
  • Email:
/ Bohumír Lojkásek
  • Department of Biology and Ecology, Faculty of Natural Sciences, University of Ostrava, Chitussiho 10, CZ-71000, Slezská Ostrava, Czech Republic
  • Email:
Published Online: 2012-06-30 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/s11756-012-0071-4


Comparisons of morphology, nuclear gene sequencing and microsatellites were used to identify 19 hybrids between the related species Cottus poecilopus and Cottus gobio in three rivers of the Odra River drainage basin. All hybrids were the results of backcrossing and no F1 generation hybrid was found. The resulting progeny are fertile and continue in backcrossing with parental conspecifics. A high representation of backcrosses appears to indicate a lack of reproduction barriers within the hybridization process. It was impossible to differentiate individual back-cross categories on the sole basis of six loci. Mitochondrial haplotypes indicate that this is not a one-way process. In our study, hybridization was asymmetrical in favour of Cottus poecilopus.

Keywords: bullheads; hybrid zones; microsatellites; S7 nuclear gene

  • [1] Allendorf F.W., Leary R.F. & Spruell P. 2001. The problems with hybrids: setting conservation guidelines. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 16(11): 613–622. DOI:10.1016/S0169-5347(01)02290-X http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0169-5347(01)02290-XCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [2] Alves M.J., Coelho M.M. & Collares-Pereira M.J. 1997. The Rutilus alburnoides complex (Cyprinidae): evidence for hybrid origin. J. Zool. Syst. Evol. Research 35(1): 1–10. DOI: 10.1111/j.1439-0469.1997.tb00398.x CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [3] Andreasson S. 1968. Hybridisering mellan stensimpa och bergsimpa. Fauna och Flora 63(6): 242–251. Google Scholar

  • [4] Andreasson S. 1972. Distribution of Cottus poecilopus Heckel and Cottus gobio (L.) (Pisces) in Scandinavia. Zoologica Scripta 1(2): 69–78. DOI: 10.1111/j.1463-6409.1972.tb00570.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1463-6409.1972.tb00570.xCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [5] Anderson E.C. & Thomson E.A. 2002. A model-based method for identifying species hybrids using multilocus genetic data. Genetics 160(3): 1217–1299. PMID: 1462008 Google Scholar

  • [6] Arnold M.L. & Hodges S.A. 1995. Are natural hybrids fit or infit relative to their parents? Trends Ecol. Evol. 10(2): 67–71. DOI: 10.1016/S0169-5347(00)88979-X http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0169-5347(00)88979-XCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [7] Asmussen M.A. & Basten Ch.J. 1996. Constraints and normalized measures for cytonuclear disequilibria. Heredity 76(Pt 3): 207–214. DOI: 10.1038/hdy.1996.33 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/hdy.1996.33CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [8] Basten Ch.J. & Asmussen M.A. 1997. The exact test for cytonuclear disequilibria. Genetics 146(3): 1165–1171. PMID: 9215917 Google Scholar

  • [9] Belkhir K., Borsa P., Chikhi L., Raufaste N. & Bonhomme F. 1996–2004. GENETIX 4.05, logiciel sous Windows TM pour la génétique des populations. Laboratoire Génome, Populations, Interactions, CNRS UMR 5171, Université de Montpellier II, Montpellier (France). http://www.eeb.ucla.edu/Faculty/Barber/Software.htm Google Scholar

  • [10] Berrebi P., Cattaneo-Berrebi G. & Le Brun N. 1993. Natural hybridization of two species of tetraploid barbels: Barbus meridionalis and Barbus barbus (Osteichthyes, Cyprinidae) in southern France. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 48(4): 319–333. DOI: 10.1111/j.1095-8312.1993.tb02094.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8312.1993.tb02094.xCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [11] Boecklen W.J. & Howard D.J. 1997. Genetic analysis of hybrid zones: numbers of markers and power of resolution. Ecology 78(8): 2611–2616. DOI: 10.1890/0012-9658(1997)078[2611: GAOHZN]2.0.CO;2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1890/0012-9658(1997)078[2611:GAOHZN]2.0.CO;2CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [12] Chow S. & Hazama K. 1998. Universal PCR primers for S7 ribosomal protein gene introns in fish. Mol. Ecol. 7(9): 1255–1256. Google Scholar

  • [13] Coombs J.A., Letcher B.H. & Nislow K.H. 2008. CREATE: a software to create input files from diploid genotypic data for 52 genetic software programs. Mol. Ecol. Resources 8(3): 578–580. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-8286.2007.02036.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-8286.2007.02036.xWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • [14] Crespin L. & Berrebi P. 1999. Asymmetrical introgression in freshwater fish hybrid zone as revealed by a morphological index of hybridization. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 67(1): 57–72. DOI: 10.1006/bijl.1998.0287 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8312.1999.tb01929.xCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [15] Čihař J. 1969. Taxonomical and ecological notes on Cottus gobio Linnaeus, 1758, and Cottus poecilopus Heckel, 1836 (Osteichthyes: Cotidae). Acta Soc. Zool. Bohemoslov. 33(2): 102–110. Google Scholar

  • [16] Demandt M.H. & Bergek S. 2009. Identification of cyprinid hybrids by using geometric morphometrics and microsatellites. J. Appl. Ichthyol. 25(6): 695–701. DOI: 10.1111/j.1439-0426.2009.01329.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0426.2009.01329.xCrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • [17] Dudu A., Suciu R., Paraschiv M., Georgescu S.E., Costache M. & Berrebi P. 2011. Nuclear markers of Danube sturgeons hybridization. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 12(10): 6796–6809. DOI: 10.3390/ijms12106796 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms12106796Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [18] Englbrecht C.C., Largiader C.R., Hänfling B. & Tautzs D. 1999. Isolation and characterization of polymorphic loci in the European bullhead Cottus gobio L. (Osteichthyes) and their applicability to related taxa. Mol. Ecol. 8(11): 1966–1969. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-294x.1999.00778-6.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-294x.1999.00778-6.xCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [19] Excoffier L. & Lischer H.E.L. 2010. Arlequin suite ver 3.5: A new series of programs to perform population genetics analyses under Linux and Windows. Mol. Ecol. Resources 10(3): 564–567. DOI: 10.1111/j.1755-0998.2010.02847.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-0998.2010.02847.xWeb of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [20] Freyhof J., Lieckfeldt D., Pitra Ch. & Ludwig A. 2005. Molecules and morphology: Evidence for introgression of mitochondrial DNA in Dalmatian cyprinids. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 37(2): 347–354. DOI: 10.1016/j.ympev.2005.07.018 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2005.07.018CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [21] Goudet J. 2001. FSTAT, a program to estimate and test gene diversities and fixation indices (version 2.9.3). Available from http://www.unil.ch/izea/softwares/fstat.html. Updated from Goudet (1995) Google Scholar

  • [22] Hänfling B., Bolton P., Harley M. & Carvalho G. 2005. A molecular approach to detect hybridisation between crucian carp (Carassius carassius) and nonindigenous carp species (Carassius spp. and Cyprinus carpio). Freshwater Biol. 50(3): 403–417. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2427.2004.01330.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2427.2004.01330.xCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [23] Iguchi K., Yamamoto G., Matsubara N. & Nishida N. 2003. Morphological and genetic analysis of fish of a Carassius complex (Cyprinidae) in Lake Kasumigaura with reference to the taxonomic status of two all-female triploid morphs. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 79(2): 351–357. DOI: 10.1046/j.1095-8312.2003.00196.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1095-8312.2003.00196.xCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [24] Lajbner Z., ŠlechtovŠlechta V., Švátora M., Berrebi P. & Kotlík P. 2009. Rare and asymmetrical hybridization of the endemic Barbus carpathicus with its widespread congener Barbus barbus. J. Fish. Biol. 74(2): 418–436. DOI: 10.1111/j.1095-8649.2008.02098.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8649.2008.02098.xCrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • [25] Lusk S., Bartoňová E., Lusková V., Lojkásek B. & Koščo J. 2008. Vranka pruhoploutvá Cottus poecilopus - rozšíření a genetická diverzita v povodí řek Morava, Odra (Česk Hornád (Slovensko) [Siberian sculpin Cottus poecilopus: distribution and genetic diversity in the Morava, Odra (Czech Republic), and Hornád (Slovakia) drainage areas], pp. 67–80. In: Lusk S. & Lusková V. (eds), Biodiverzita ichtyofauny Česk, ústav biologie obratlovců AV ČR, v.v.i., Brno. ISBN: 978-80-87189-01-6 Google Scholar

  • [26] Lusk S., Halačka K. & Lusková V. 1998. The effect of an extreme flood on the fish communities in the upper reaches of the Tichá Orlice River (The Labe drainage basin). Czech J. Anim. Sci. 43: 531–536. Google Scholar

  • [27] Lusk S., Lusková V., Bartoňová E. & Havelka J. 2011. Ryby a mihule v horní části řeky Svratky [Fishes and lamprey in upper part of Svratka River], pp. 98–108. In: Lusk S. & Lusková V. (eds), Biodiverzita ichtyofauny Česk of Fishes in the Czech Republic], ústav biologie obratlovců AV ČR, v.v.i., Brno. ISBN: 978-80-87189-08-5. Google Scholar

  • [28] Lojkásek B., Lusk S., Halačka K., Lusková V. & Drozd P. 2005. The impact of the extreme floods in July 1997 on the ichthyocenosis of the Oder catchment area (Czech Republic). Hydrobiologia 548(1): 11–22. DOI: 10.1007/s10750-005-3644-1 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10750-005-3644-1CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [29] Mahen J. 1927. Naše vranky [Our bullheads]. Rybářský věstník 7: 100–101, 116–117, 132–133. Google Scholar

  • [30] Müller K. 1960. Beitrag zur Systematik und Verbreitung von Cottus gobio L. und Cottus poecilopus. Kungl. Fysiografiska Sällskapets I Lund Förhandlingar 30(8): 57–66. Google Scholar

  • [31] Nesbo C.L., Arab M.O. & Jakobsen K.S. 1998. Heteroplasmy, length and sequence variation in the mtDNA control regions of three percid fish species (Perca fluviatilis, Acerina cernua, Stizostedion lucioperca). Genetics 148(4): 1907–1919. Google Scholar

  • [32] Nolte A.W., Freyhof J. & Tautz D. 2006. When invader meets locally adapted types: rapid moulding of hybrid zones between sculpins (Cottus, Pisces) in the Rhine system. Mol. Ecol. 15(7): 1983–1993. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2006.02906.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2006.02906.xCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [33] Nolte A.W., Gompert Z. & Buerkle C.A. 2009. Variable patterns in two sculpin hybrid zones suggest that genomic isolation differs among populations. Mol. Ecol. 18(12): 2615–2627. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2009.04208.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2009.04208.xCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [34] Papoušek I., Vetešník L., Halačka K., Lusková V., Humpl M. & Mendel J. 2008. Identification of natural hybrids of gibel carp Carassius auratus gibelio (Bloch) and crucian carp Carassius carassius (L.) from lower Dyje River floodplain (Czech Republic). J. Fish Biol. 72(5): 1230–1235. DOI: 10.1111/j.1095-8649.2007.01783.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8649.2007.01783.xWeb of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [35] Peakall R. & Smouse P.E. 2006. GENALEX 6: genetic analysis in Excel. Population genetic software for teaching and research. Mol. Ecol. Notes 6(1): 288–295. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-8286.2005.01155.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-8286.2005.01155.xCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [36] Pitts C.S., Jordan D.R., Cowx I.G. & Jones N.V. 1997. Controlled breeding studies to verify the identity of roach and common bream hybrids from a natural population. J. Fish Biol. 51(4): 686–696. DOI: 10.1111/j.1095-8649.1997.tb01991.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8649.1997.tb01991.xCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [37] Pritchard J.K., Stephens M. & Donnelly P. 2000. Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 155(2): 945–959. PMID: 10835412 Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • [38] Sambrook J., Fritsch E. & Maniatis T. 1989. Molecular Cloning: a Laboratory Manual, 2nd ed. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, New York, 654 pp. ISBN-10: 0879693096, ISBN-13: 978-0879693091 Google Scholar

  • [39] Schwartz F.J. 2001. Freshwater and marine fish family hybrids: A worldwide changing scene revealed by the scientific literature. Journal of the Elisha Mitchell Scientific Society 117(1): 62–65. Google Scholar

  • [40] Seehausen O., Takimoto G., Roy D. & Jokela J. 2008. Speciation reversal and biodiversity dynamics with hybridization in changing enviroments. Mol. Ecol. 17(1): 30–44. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2007.03529.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2007.03529.xCrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • [41] Starmach J. 1965. Koppen in der Karpathenflüssen. II. Antreten und Charakteristik der Buntflossenkoppe (Cottus poecilopus Heckel) und weissflossigen Koppe (Cottus gobio L.) in Raba Flussgebiet. Acta Hydrobiol. 7: 109–140. Google Scholar

  • [42] Sweigart A. 2009. Sculpin hybrid zones: natural laboratories for the early stages of speciation. Mol. Ecol. 18(12): 2547–2548. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2009.04209.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2009.04209.xWeb of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [43] Tamura K., Peterson D., Peterson N., Stecher G., Nei M. & Kumar S. 2011. MEGA5: Molecular evolutionary genetics analysis using maximum likelihood, evolutionary distance, and maximum parsimony methods. Mol. Biol. Evol. 28(10): 2731–2739. DOI: 10.1093/molbev/msr121 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msr121Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [44] Turner G.F. 1999. What is a species? Rev. Fish Biol. Fisheries 9(4): 281–297. DOI: 10.1023/A:1008903228512 http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1008903228512CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [45] Van Oosterhout C., Hutchinson W.F., Wills D.P.M. & Shipley P. 2004. MICRO-CHECKER: software for identifying and correcting genotyping errors in microsatellite data. Mol. Ecol. Notes 4(3): 535–538. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-8286.2004.00684.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-8286.2004.00684.xCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [46] Wyatt P.M.W., Pitts C.S. & Butlin R.K. 2006. A molecular approach to detect hybridization between bream Abramis brama, roach Rutilus rutilus and rudd Scardinius erythropthalmus. J. Fish Biol. 69(Suppl. A): 52–71. DOI: 10.1111/j.1095-8649.2006.01104.x http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8649.2006.01104.xCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [47] Zelinka M. 1951. K zeměpisnému rozšíření vranek na Moravě [To geographic distribution of sculpins in Moravia]. Akvaristické listy 23(3): 30–32. Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2012-06-30

Published in Print: 2012-08-01

Citation Information: Biologia, ISSN (Online) 1336-9563, ISSN (Print) 0006-3088, DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/s11756-012-0071-4.

Export Citation

© 2012 Slovak Academy of Sciences. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License. BY-NC-ND 3.0

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in