Image Credit: Natural History Museum London’s collection of houting fish, by Ymke Winkel
Researchers from the University of Amsterdam and the Natural History Museum London have discovered that the houting fish, previously classified as extinct, is still flourishing. The scientific team reached this conclusion through DNA analysis, comparing the houting with its close relative, the European whitefish.
Once considered extinct and indigenous to estuaries of the North Sea, the houting has been found to be far from extinct. Scientists at the University of Amsterdam and the Natural History Museum London conducted DNA testing on preserved houting specimens from the museum’s collection, some over 250 years old. They then compared this DNA with that of modern sibling species, finding insignificant genetic variance between the houting and the European whitefish, a species that remains abundant.
Table of Contents
Scientific Findings in DNA Research
Recently published in the scholarly journal BMC Ecology and Evolution, the researchers detailed their methods of isolating mitochondrial DNA from the fish samples. Among the samples was a piece of DNA from a dried houting specimen from the North Sea dating back to 1754, which had been used by Linnaeus for the species’ formal description. The team then utilized this DNA data to construct a phylogenetic tree, where all the studied houting specimens (Coregonus oxyrinchus) grouped together with the European whitefish (Coregonus lavaretus).
Clarifying Species Status
Rob Kroes, the lead author of the study from the University of Amsterdam, stated that the European whitefish is common in both freshwater and saltwater bodies across Western and Northern Europe. Because the study found no distinguishable species differences between historical houting and contemporary European whitefish, the team concludes that houting should not be considered extinct.
Morphological Traits Versus Genetic Evidence
The mistaken classification of the houting as extinct in 2008 is attributed to the misconceptions arising from morphological variations. Kroes elaborates that confusion often arises in identifying species, particularly among fish, due to variability in physical traits like snout length and gill raker count. Prior to the DNA study, these traits were incorrectly used to classify houting as a separate species from the European whitefish.
Pending Nomenclature Revision
The findings suggest that the official Latin name for the species may require modification, though further analysis of the 1754 dried fish specimen’s DNA is needed for a conclusive name change. Rob Kroes concludes that although the DNA is old and damaged, further study should be undertaken. He points out the paradox that currently exists in wildlife protection laws, which simultaneously list North Sea houting as extinct while mandating its protection alongside the European whitefish.
Reference: “Phylogenetic Analysis of Museum Specimens of Houting Coregonus Oxyrinchus Indicates a Reconsideration of Its Extinct Status” by R. Kroes, Y. Winkel, J. A. J. Breeuwer, E. E. van Loon, S. P. Loader, J. S. Maclaine, P. F. M. Verdonschot, and H. G. van der Geest, published on September 27, 2023, in BMC Ecology and Evolution.
DOI: 10.1186/s12862-023-02161-7
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about DNA Evidence on Extinct Houting Fish
What is the main focus of the research conducted by the University of Amsterdam and the Natural History Museum London?
The main focus of the research is to investigate whether the houting fish, previously classified as extinct, still exists. The study was conducted through DNA analysis, where the genetic material of preserved houting specimens was compared to that of the European whitefish, a closely related species.
Who are the main contributors to this research?
The main contributors to this research are scientists from the University of Amsterdam and the Natural History Museum London. The lead author of the study is Rob Kroes from the University of Amsterdam.
Where was the study published?
The study was published in the scholarly journal BMC Ecology and Evolution.
What methodology was used in the research?
Researchers isolated mitochondrial DNA from preserved houting specimens, some of which were over 250 years old. This DNA was then compared to the DNA of the European whitefish, a currently abundant species. A phylogenetic tree was also constructed to examine the genetic relationships between the two species.
Why was the houting fish previously considered extinct?
The houting fish was officially declared extinct in 2008 due to certain morphological traits, such as the length of the snout and the number of gill rakers. These traits led biologists to believe that houting was a different species from the European whitefish.
What is the significance of the findings?
The findings challenge the previous classification of the houting fish as extinct. The DNA analysis showed insignificant genetic difference between the houting and the European whitefish, indicating that the houting is not a separate species and should not be considered extinct.
Will the official Latin name for houting change?
The study suggests that a nomenclature revision may be in order. However, additional research on the DNA of a dried houting specimen from 1754 is required to make a definitive change to the species’ official Latin name.
What are the implications for wildlife protection laws?
The research highlights a paradox in current wildlife protection laws, which list the North Sea houting as extinct while also mandating its protection along with the European whitefish. This calls for a review and possible adjustment of these laws.
What is the next step in this research?
The next step involves additional DNA research on the 1754 dried fish specimen to definitively conclude whether a change in the official Latin name is warranted. Rob Kroes indicates that although the DNA is old and damaged, further study should be undertaken.
Where can I find the full study?
The full study can be accessed in the journal BMC Ecology and Evolution, published on September 27, 2023, with the DOI: 10.1186/s12862-023-02161-7.
More about DNA Evidence on Extinct Houting Fish
- BMC Ecology and Evolution Journal
- Natural History Museum London
- University of Amsterdam Research Departments
- IUCN Red List of Threatened Species
- Mitochondrial DNA Explained
- Introduction to Phylogenetic Trees
- Wildlife Protection Laws in Europe
- Species Classification and Nomenclature
- Understanding DNA Analysis in Ecology
- Historical Background of Carl Linnaeus
7 comments
This is exactly why we shouldn’t jump to conclusions about declaring species extinct. There’s so much we dont know! And to think that laws were in place to protect an “extinct” species. smh
Dont usually read up on science stuff, but this is kind of intriguing. If we were wrong about a fish, what else are we wrong about? Makes me rethink a few things.
Its so fascinating to see how DNA technology can provide new insights. I can’t wait to see what further research on the 1754 specimen reveals.
Wow, this is pretty mind-blowing stuff. So basically the fish we thought was extinct ain’t so? That’s like finding a dodo bird alive and kicking. Science, man, it’s always full of surprises!
Wait, so are they going to change the name of the fish or what? The article says its pending but what’s the hold up. Old DNA? Seems like a weak reason to me.
Love how DNA can rewrite history, or at least correct it. Makes you wonder what else is out there that we think is extinct but actually isnt.
I can’t get over the fact that it was the length of the snout and the number of gill rakers that led them to think it was a different species in the first place. Seems a bit simplistic, doesn’t it?