The distributions of two bitterling fish (subfamily: Acheilognathinae), Tanakia lanceolata and T. limbata, overlap in western Japan. Acheilognathinae fish lay their eggs in the gills of freshwater bivalves, and the early juvenile stage develops in the gills. Populations of freshwater bivalves are declining worldwide, which has limited the number of spawning substrate for bitterlings. T. limbata has been artificially introduced to some rivers in Ehime, Japan, where it coexists with native T. lanceolata, and some hybrids have been observed. We collected both species from several sites in western Japan, and from the Kunichi River system in Ehime, and analyzed genetic population structure based on six microsatellite loci and sequences of the mitochondrial cytochrome b gene. Structure analysis identified three genetically distinct populations: T. lanceolata, T. limbata "West Kyushu", and T. limbata "Setouchi". Two clades of T. limbata were also supported by molecular phylogenetic analyses based on cytochrome b. Hybrids in Ehime originated mostly from interbreeding between male T. lanceolata and female T. limbata "West Kyushu", and made up 10.2% of all collected fish, suggesting that hybrids occurred frequently between females of colonizing species and males of native species. On the other hand, interspecific hybrids were detected at rates of 40.0%, 20.0%, and 17.6% in the Ima River (Fukuoka), Midori River (Kumamoto), and Kase River (Saga), respectively, which are naturally sympatric regions. We found a few T. limbata "Setouchi" in the Midori and Kase Rivers, which were supposed to be introduced from other regions, coexisting with native T. limbata "West Kyushu", and this cryptic invasion may have triggered the interspecific hybridization. These results suggest that artificial introduction of a fish species, a decline in the unionid population, and degradation of habitat have caused broad hybridization of bitterlings in western Japan.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 October 2020.
All research outputs
#2,085,928
of 25,899,121 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#25,240
of 225,910 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,353
of 347,796 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#471
of 3,425 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,899,121 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 225,910 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 347,796 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,425 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
