Laserfiche WebLink
<br />at -20 Oc in a kitchen freezer prior to storage at -80 oC. <br /> <br />Liver samples were obtained from dissected specimens caught at <br /> <br />various places within the Colorado River drainage or from <br /> <br />hQtchery stock as outlined in Table 1. <br /> <br />Similar~y processed were <br /> <br />tui chubs, ~. bicolor, from Bishop Creek, Nevad2 (see Collection <br /> <br />G4 in Hubbs et al., 1974), and 50 Utah chubs, ~. atraria, from <br /> <br />five locations (Table 1). <br /> <br />All samples were placed in their own <br /> <br />labelled containers and stored under ultr?cold conditions. <br /> <br />Starch gel electrophoresis and histochemical staining procedures <br /> <br />followed Selander et al. (1971) and Harris and Hopkinson (1976), <br /> <br />with 3ss2yed proteins listed in Table 2. <br /> <br />All sample homogenates <br /> <br />were prepared in a pH 7.0 buffer solution. <br /> <br />Fin assays were <br /> <br />selected, in part, from those protein systems considered most <br /> <br />likely to be expressed in such tissue (D. Buth, pers. com.), <br /> <br />while the selections for liver were made, more or less randomly, <br /> <br />from proteins listed in Buth (1984). <br /> <br />Results were analysed as <br /> <br />single-individual genotypes using BIOSIS-1 <Version 2.0' a <br /> <br />program for the analysis of electrophoretic data (Swofford and <br /> <br />Selander, 1931), on a VAX computer. <br /> <br />RESULTS <br /> <br />~o differences were found in assays of fin clips. <br /> <br />In contrast, <br /> <br />sevpr~l differences were seen in co~parisons of liver protei~s. <br /> <br />4 <br />