**The title, authors, and abstract for this completion report are
provided below. For a copy of the completion report, please contact the
GLFC via e-mail or via telephone
at 734-662-3209**
Identifying the most effective mixtures for
use of the sea lamprey migratory pheromone in trapping and redistribution
management scenarios
C. Michael Wagner1, and Trevor D. Meckley1
1
Michigan State University, Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, 13 Natural Resources
Building, East Lansing, MI, 48824
Novemeber
2010
Abstract
1.
The sea lamprey (Petromyzon marinus)
completes its life‐cycle after a long migration from offshore feeding
areas to riverine spawning grounds. This movement is
guided by a migratory pheromone composed of at least three sulfated steroids
(bile acids) produced by larvae living in stream sediments. Two functional hypotheses
have been set forth for the migratory pheromone. First, at the transition from lacustrine migration to riverine
migration the presence of migratory pheromone induces staging and/or entry into
activated streams by migratory sea lampreys. Second, after the onset of the riverine migration the presence of migratory pheromone
mediates tributary selection by altering movement pathways in streams. Here, we
report a series of field and laboratory experiments designed to test the
validity of each hypothesis.
2.
In 2007 we
examined the relative attractiveness of three combinations of synthesized pheromone
components (PADS, PADS+PSDS, PADS+PSDS+PS) at two concentrations (10‐13 M, 10‐12
M) vs. a methanol control in a Michigan stream. We expected the compounds to
prove attractive per pervious work using whole larval odor (Functional
Hypothesis 2). Migrating lamprey exhibited no preference for the synthesized
compounds while continuing to exhibit a strong preference for larval odor in a
natural stream. These findings were presented to GLFC staff and base on several
discussions we decided to focus our collective efforts in 2008 on ascertaining
whether the negative result was due to a failure in the identification and/or synthesis
of the compounds.
3.
In 2008 we examined
the behavioral responses of migratory adult sea lamprey to synthesized migratory
pheromone components and larval odor in the laboratory using two‐choice test protocols developed by Peter Sorensen and
colleagues. We were unable to generate results comparable to those previously
published using purified natural compounds.
4.
In 2009 we
initiated a pilot‐project to investigate whether the addition of
synthesized migratory pheromones would induce staging behavior at a river mouth
(Functional Hypothesis #1). We tracked 20 acoustically‐tagged lacustrine migration
phase lampreys as they approached the mouth of a small river that recently
underwent lampricide treatment to remove the larval population. Following
treatment we tracked the movements of migratory sea lamprey as they approached,
entered, or bypassed the river mouth under two conditions: 1) with greatly reduced
or absent larval odor following treatment (ten lampreys); and, 2) after the
addition of the synthesized pheromone components PADS and PSDS at ‐12 M (ten lampreys). We were able to describe two
clear, search‐related modes of behavior in migratory sea lamprey:
coastal searching and river‐mouth
locating. Further, river‐mouth locating occurred more frequently on nights when
synthesized pheromone components were added to the Black Mallard River discharge.
These data are not confirmatory of Functional Hypothesis #1; our sample size
was too small to offer any substantial conclusion. However, the patterns we
observed are consistent with Functional Hypothesis #1 and merit further
investigation.