Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />II <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />71 <br />Detection of such changes demonstrates the sensitivity of body lipids to environmental <br />variation. <br /> <br />3. 230C <br /> <br /> <br />Mean length, weight and lipid levels of newly hatched larvae, a sub-sample of the <br /> <br />same group oflarvae utilized for the 140C temperature treatment, were 8.2:t .02 mm, 0.2 <br /> <br />:t 0.02 mg, 0.04:t 0.003 mg, and 19.5:t 0.4 % respectively. <br /> <br />Length increases were clearly extremely rapid (Figure 16 a). Unfortunately all <br /> <br />larvae from d 6 until the end of the experiment (d 24) were lost due to freezer failure. By <br /> <br />d 24, however, Ad libitum larvae averaged 21.96 mm in TL. Starved larvae continued to <br /> <br />increase in length through d 17, reaching an average size of 12 mm TL, significantly <br /> <br />shorter than Ad libitum larvae (Table 16). Ad libitum larvae averaged 9.04 mg at the end <br /> <br />of the experiment, whereas Starved larvae averaged a significantly lower weight at 0.37 <br /> <br />mg (Figure 16 b, Table 16). Lipid levels for the former remained high, and significantly <br /> <br />greater than levels for Starved larvae, averaging near 18% (Table 17, Figure 16 c). Lipid <br /> <br />levels for Starved larvae dropped quickly to about 10% and remained there. <br /> <br />4. Comparison of Temperature levels: <br /> <br />A. Growth <br />As expected, maximum growth rate of razorback sucker larvae was dependent <br /> <br />upon temperature. Length and weight changes were most marked at Ad libitum feeding <br />