Our understanding of the sensory systems and behavior of animals is challenging to contextualize within the framework of evolution. Anatomical comparisons between species have allowed us to infer sensory capabilities, but this approach cannot directly reveal neural function. Discovery of neural mechanisms that underlie behavior are often constrained to a limited number of model species (Jourjine and Hoekstra, 2021). Like morphology, neural circuits can adapt to the environment. Of these, many circuits are sensory and regulate essential behaviors such as foraging, navigation, and escapes (Blin et al., 2018; Hoke et al., 2012; Hüppop, 1987; Paz et al., 2020).

The Mexican blind cavefish, Astyanax mexicanus, is a powerful model to understand the evolution of physiological and molecular traits that contribute to behaviors such as sleep (Duboué et al., 2011; Jaggard et al., 2018) and prey capture (Lloyd et al., 2018; Yoshizawa et al., 2014). A. mexicanus exists in two morphs: (1) eyed surface-dwelling populations and (2) blind cave populations. There are at least 30 independently evolved cavefish populations in the caves of the Sierra de El Abra region of Northeast Mexico (Espinasa et al., 2018; Herman et al., 2018; McGaugh et al., 2020; Mitchell et al., 1997). A. mexicanus populations are interfertile, and this attribute has allowed investigators to demonstrate independent convergence of numerous behavioral, developmental, and physiological traits (Chin et al., 2018; Kowalko, 2020; Riddle et al., 2018; Stockdale et al., 2018; Varatharasan et al., 2009). Our goal is to apply a neurophysiological approach across multiple A. mexicanus populations to examine the functional evolution of the lateral line sensory system.

The mechanoreceptive hair cells of the lateral line system detects fluid motion relative to the body and play an important role in essential behaviors (McHenry et al., 2009; Mekdara et al., 2018; Olszewski et al., 2012; Oteiza et al., 2017; Stewart et al., 2013). Cavefish have evolved anatomical enhancements of the lateral line, presumably to compensate for the loss of vision (Kowalko, 2020; McGaugh et al., 2020; Teyke, 1990; Yoshizawa et al., 2012). These anatomical alterations have been linked to substantial changes in behavior (Lloyd et al., 2018; Yoshizawa et al., 2010). However, almost nothing is known about physiological changes that accompany evolution, despite the fact that the response of peripheral senses to environmental change has been well documented (Kelley et al., 2018; McBride, 2007).

Endogenous depolarizations within sensory cells are transmitted to afferent neurons (hereafter ‘afferents’) as spontaneous action potentials (hereafter ‘spikes’), and are essential for maintaining a state of responsiveness and sensitivity (Kiang, 1965; Manley and Robertson, 1976). For example, the spontaneous spikes from auditory hair cells have been shown to enable precise encoding of much higher frequencies (Köppl, 1997). Here, we suggest a similar underlying mechanism, though the correlation of spontaneous activity to sensitivity in the lateral line awaits empirical evidence. In the lateral line, spontaneous depolarizing currents within the hair cell maintain a resting potential within the critical activation range of channels. This range is required to ensure transmitter release; thus these currents decrease the detection threshold of the system (Trapani and Nicolson, 2011). Spontaneous afferent activity is an established and reliable target for probing the neurophysiological basis of sensitivity across taxa (Hedwig, 2006; Krasne and Bryan, 1973; Mohr et al., 2003). Here, we use spontaneous afferent activity as an entry point into understanding the neural mechanism underlying lateral line function in cavefish.

Another important mechanism that determines lateral line sensitivity is an inhibitory feedback effect of the efferent system during swimming. Feedback mechanisms in general sculpt sensory systems in important ways; for example, by changing detection thresholds by altering the transmission frequency of afferent spikes (Crapse and Sommer, 2008; Straka et al., 2018). The efferent system of hair cells in particular has repeatedly evolved to modulate sensory processing (Köppl, 2011). More specifically, hindbrain efferent neurons (hereafter ‘efferents’) issue predictive signals that transmit in parallel to locomotor commands, termed corollary discharge (CD). CDs inhibit afferent activity to mitigate sensor fatigue that can result from self-generated stimuli (Russell and Roberts, 1972). CD is an important mechanism for sensitivity enhancement but has rarely been implicated for ecologically relevant behaviors. For example, active-flow sensing by cavefish depends on detecting reafferent signals while swimming (Tan et al., 2011). Increased reliance on self-generated fluid motion (Odstrcil et al., 2022; Patton et al., 2010; Teyke, 1985) is divergent from our current understanding of the CD’s role in predictive motor signaling in the lateral line (Lunsford et al., 2019; Pichler and Lagnado, 2020).

For the first time, we identify a neurophysiological mechanism that has convergently evolved across A. mexicanus populations to increase hair cell sensitivity after eye loss. By investigating how differences in afferent and efferent signaling contribute to sensory enhancement in a comparative model, we provide insight into a potentially ubiquitous mechanism for sensory evolution.

Neuromasts of surface fish and Pachón cavefish larvae (6 days post fertilization; dpf) were labeled via 2-[4-(dimethylamino)styryl]-1-ethylpyridinium iodide (DASPEI) staining and subsequently imaged (Figure 1B, C). Anterior lateral line (ALL) neuromasts had previously been shown to differ in quantities and morphology as early as 2 months post fertilization between surface and cavefish (Yoshizawa et al., 2010). Here, we show that Pachón cavefish exhibit this significant increase in anterior neuromast quantity as early as 6 dpf (p < 0.01, t = 3.168, df = 29; Figure 1D). In contrast, both populations exhibit a similar number of posterior lateral line neuromasts (p = 0.77, U = 111.5; Figure 1E). Neuromasts along the posterior lateral line were comprised of similar quantities of hair cells across blind (n = 11) and surface morphs (n = 9; p = 0.09; Figure 1F). No significant interaction was detected between the effects of population and age (5–7 dpf; F_2,72 = 2.96, p = 0.06; Figure 1G). We exclusively probed the posterior lateral line afferent neurons to establish whether sensory systems that are anatomically similar exhibit neurophysiological differences that contribute to enhanced sensitivity.

Figure 1

Download asset Open asset

To examine the physiological basis of differences in lateral line function across surface and cavefish we used extracellular lateral line recordings adapted from protocols used in zebrafish (Figure 2A, B). Extracellular recordings of posterior lateral line afferents revealed intrinsic spontaneous activity was higher in Pachón cavefish (18.6 ± 0.2 Hz) while the animal was at rest, relative to surface fish (12.4 ± 0.3 Hz; p < 0.01, t = 15.97, df = 5,795; Figure 2C). Single neuromasts were then deflected and evoked activity was recorded from the connected afferent neuron (Figure 2D, E). The neuromasts were stimulated at different frequencies (5–40 Hz) and a pairwise comparison of evoked afferent activity at 30 Hz revealed statistically elevated spike rates in Pachón cavefish (n = 12; 119.6 ± 16.6 Hz) relative to surface fish (n = 10; 73.2 ± 6.9 Hz; p = 0.03, t = 2.38, df = 18; Figure 2F). Significantly elevated spike rates were also detected in response to a 40-Hz stimulus in Pachón cavefish (101.3 ± 13.6 Hz) relative to surface fish (52.3 ± 7.0 Hz; p < 0.01, t = 3.00, df = 18; Figure 2F). Together these findings support spontaneous afferent activity as a reliable metric for estimating the sensitivity of the lateral line and reveal enhanced neural responses to hair cell deflection in cavefish.

Figure 2

Download asset Open asset

We examined afferent signaling during motor commands in our paralyzed preparation which were denoted by bouts of fictive swimming (hereafter swimming). Swim bouts of longer duration were observed in surface fish (357 ± 5 ms; n = 3167 swim bouts) when compared to Pachón cavefish (264 ± 4 ms; n = 2612 swim bouts; p < 0.01, t-stat = 15.2, df = 5777). Instantaneous afferent spike rate demonstrates substantial decreases during swimming in surface fish and little effect in Pachón cavefish (Figure 3A, B). We quantified and compared spike rates during swimming relative to the pre-swim period to examine patterns of the inhibitory effect between populations. During most surface fish swim bouts there was a reduction in afferent activity (n = 1966/2291, 85.8%), many of which resulted in complete quiescence of transmissions (n = 1112/2291, 48.5%). Conversely, afferent activity partially reduced during many swim bouts in Pachón cavefish (n = 1303/2439, 53.4%), but very few instances led to complete inhibition (n = 275/2439, 11.3%). The distributions of relative spike rates during swimming reveal surface fish have a higher likelihood of experiencing no afferent activity during swimming while cavefish experience afferent activity during swimming similar to that of pre-swim activity levels (Figure 3C). Therefore, surface fish experience significantly higher levels of inhibition (68.5 ± 0.01%) compared to cavefish (28.9 ± 0.01%; p < 0.01, t = 36.5, df = 4449; Figure 3D). Surface fish demonstrate lateral line inhibition during swimming comparable to other fishes with intact visual systems (Flock and Russell, 1973; Lunsford et al., 2019; Pichler and Lagnado, 2020; Russell and Roberts, 1972) suggesting cavefish have evolved a unique functional phenotype for sensory gain control.

Figure 3

Download asset Open asset

We imaged hindbrain cholinergic efferent neurons to determine anatomical and functional connectivity. Between populations, backfilled efferents revealed similar soma quantities (surface: 2.4±0.3; cave: 3.2±0.5; p = 0.2, t = 1.36, df = 18) and size (surface: 62.1 ± 3.6 µm²; cave: 70.9 ± 4.5 µm²; p = 0.1, t = 1.50, df = 51; Figure 4A–C). From electrophysiological recordings, we observed average spike rates during and prior to a swim were not positively correlated in control surface fish (r²=0.15, F_1,13 = 2.3, p = 0.2), but the slope of the line indicates a fractional suppression of 78% that is significantly less than unity (slope 0.1, confidence interval [CI]: −0.2 to 0.4; Figure 4Di). In the efferent-ablated surface fish, the spike rates during swimming intervals were indistinguishable from those during nonswimming intervals (slope 1.2, CI = −0.1 to 2.4) showing no detectable inhibitory effect. While swimming, surface fish without functioning efferent neurons demonstrated a signaling phenotype similar to both intact cavefish (slope 0.88, CI = −0.5 to 2.2) and cavefish with ablated efferents (slope 0.9, CI = 0.1 to 1.8; Figure 4Dii). Therefore, putative cholinergic hindbrain efferents are necessary for afferent inhibition in surface fish, but do not demonstrate modulatory control of afferents in cavefish.

Figure 4

Download asset Open asset

We compared pre-swim and swim spike rates across populations and treatments to determine efferent contribution to inhibition (Figure 4E). We found significant differences in afferent activity among pre-swim and swim intervals (F_7,40 = 7.6, p < 0.01; Figure 4F). Surface fish afferent spike rates during swimming (3.9 ± 0.1 Hz) were 71% lower than the immediate pre-swim period in control fish (13.7 ± 0.2 Hz; Tukey’s post hoc test, p < 0.01). Post-swim spike rate (13. 7 ± 0.3 Hz) recovered to pre-swim spike rate. In control Pachón cavefish, we observed some decrease in afferent spike rate during swimming (16.8 ± 0.2 Hz) but it was not statistically discriminated from pre-swim (20.5 ± 0.2 Hz; Tukey’s post hoc test, p = 0.94). Efferent ablation in surface fish resulted in afferent activity during swimming (17.4 ± 0.3 Hz) to increase to pre-swim levels (20.7 ± 0.3 Hz; Tukey’s post hoc test, p = 0.99). Ablated surface fish also demonstrated spike dynamics during swimming comparable to ablated and control cavefish (Pachón ablated, pre-swim: 18.6 ± 0.3 Hz; Pachón ablated, swimming: 14.7 ± 0.3 Hz). These findings indicate that efferents are necessary for inhibition of afferents during swimming in surface fish.

We compared lateral line activity between three different cave populations (Figure 5A); the Tinaja and Pachón populations, which are derived from similarly timed colonization events, and the Molino population that is derived from a more recent colonization event (Bradic et al., 2012; Dowling et al., 2002; Herman et al., 2018). Blind cavefish populations exhibited similar spontaneous spike rates across populations (F_2,17 = 0.68, p = 0.52), and swimming showed little effect on lateral line activity across blind cavefish populations (Figure 5B). We observed a minor decrease in afferent spike rates across cavefish populations and the relative change (i.e., inhibition) was similar in Pachón and Tinaja (Tukey’s post hoc test; Pachón: 0.28 ± 0.01; Tinaja: 0.32 ± 0.02; Figure 5C). Molino demonstrated an intermediate phenotype compared to Pachón and Tinaja (Tukey’s post hoc test; Molino: 0.23 ± 0.01; p < 0.01). The Molino population (new lineage) is most distantly related to the Pachón and Tinaja populations (old lineage), originating from a more recent surface fish colonization of caves thus providing phylogenetic evidence that coincides with statistically similar groupings (Herman et al., 2018). We examined the correlation between nonswimming and swimming spike rates across cave populations to determine whether the inhibitory effect was significant. Spike rates during swimming and pre-swim intervals were positively correlated in all cave populations, and afferent spike rates during swimming were not statistically distinguishable from unity across populations (Pachón: slope = 0.88, CI = −0.5 to 2.2; Tinaja: slope = 1.03, CI = −0.2 to 2.2; Molino: slope = 1.02, CI = 0.8 to 1.2; Figure 5D), indicating there was no significant decrease in afferent activity during swimming within blind cavefish populations.

Figure 5

Download asset Open asset

Our principal findings indicate elevated afferent spike activity and an increased responsiveness to hair cell deflection in cavefish. The increased afferent activity in cavefish is a likely consequence of eye loss, which has robust effects on other physiological systems (Duboué et al., 2011; Varatharasan et al., 2009). Heightened lateral line sensitivity in adults has been previously attributed to increased neuromast density in the ALL as well as increased hair cell quantities per neuromast (Jaggard et al., 2017; Lloyd et al., 2018; McHenry et al., 2008; Patton et al., 2010; Teyke, 1990; Yoffe et al., 2020; Yoffe et al., 2020; Yoshizawa et al., 2010). These differences do not exist in the posterior lateral line at the larval stage, allowing us a unique opportunity to investigate the neural mechanisms that can enhance flow sensing in a strong model for evolution. Our discovery of increased spontaneous activity that contributes to the enhanced evoked responses in cavefish is a powerful addition for flow sensing, and we predict that this in combination with the increased number of neuromasts in the ALL (Yoshizawa et al., 2010) is what ultimately enables cavefish to perform active-flow sensing.

Higher spontaneous activity is one of two mechanisms that are responsible for higher lateral line sensitivity. The other involves the inhibitory effects of the efferent system during swimming, a feedback mechanism that is conserved across the diversity of fishes (Flock and Russell, 1973; Lunsford et al., 2019; Montgomery et al., 1996; Montgomery and Bodznick, 1994; Roberts and Russell, 1972; Tricas and Highstein, 1991). This is true in swimming surface fish but not in cavefish. We found that three blind populations of cavefish (i.e., Pachón, Molino, and Tinaja) have repeatedly lost the capability for efferent modulation during swimming. When one considers that lateral line efferent activity can be driven by direct inputs from the visual system in zebrafish (Reinig et al., 2017), it seems possible that eye degeneration induces the loss of efferent function. This interpretation is consistent with the idea that lateral line efferents are thought to have undergone regressive loss before in the ancestral lamprey and hagfish (Kishida et al., 1987; Köppl, 2011; Koyama et al., 1990), both of which are nearly or completely blind during development (Dickson and Collard, 1979; Fernholm and Holmberg, 1975). However, our results illustrate that cholinergic efferent system is still present in cavefish, having lost functionality rather than disappearing (the efferent system is functional in surface fish). Exploring pre- and postsynaptic differences such as acetylcholine release or the density of nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChR) may explain the reduced inhibitory efficacy and reveal molecular targets that could disrupt efferent function over the course of evolution (Dawkins et al., 2005).

Our demonstration of CD inactivity in cavefish provides an alternative mechanism by which evolution can enhance sensitivity, one that proceeds by decreasing inhibition rather than augmenting sensor morphology or density (Yamamoto et al., 2009; Yoshizawa et al., 2010; Yoshizawa et al., 2014). The impact of increasing sensitivity through a lack of inhibition is apparent during active-flow sensing in adult A. mexicanus. Active-flow sensing occurs during swimming and involves using the reflection of self-generated flow fields (Bleckmann et al., 1991) to follow walls (Patton et al., 2010), avoid obstacles (Teyke, 1985; Windsor et al., 2008), and discrimination between shapes (de Perera, 2004; Hassan, 1989; von Campenhausen et al., 1981). The repeated loss of inhibition across populations at the larval stage suggests that selection may act early in development on the efferent over afferent systems. Future experiments may test this hypothesis in adults, though it seems likely that this phenomenon would be preserved and only elaborated on throughout ontogeny, rather than reconfigured. Cavefish swim by using different body motions than surface fish. This finding has been interpreted as a mechanism to enhance wall following, which occurs when the bow wake of a swimming cavefish is reflected off of a solid surface and then detected (Patton et al., 2010; Sharma et al., 2009). Altered swimming kinematics are also thought to have arisen from a general increase in sensitivity to flow (Tan et al., 2011; Windsor et al., 2008). Our results provide an alternate suggestion; the lack of efferent function in cavefish precludes the sensory feedback necessary for sensing self-movement and body position in water (proprioception). CD, a parallel motor command that decreases the afferent activity of fishes when swimming, has recently been found to play a critical role in swimming efficiency by enabling the tracking of the traveling body wave during undulation (Skandalis et al., 2021). We hypothesize that the evolved loss of efferent function that enables cavefish to successfully avoid collisions in subterranean habitats is likely favored over optimizing swimming efficiency (Nakamura, 1997; Atasavun Uysal et al., 2010). We predict that loss of efferent function will be found in other blind hypogean species (Costa Sampaio et al., 2012) and that their respective surface populations will possess intact efferent functionality, as we have found in A. mexicanus. Neurophysiological recordings across a wider diversity of species would provide valuable insight into how efferent function may be sculpted by environmental selection and phylogenetic membership.

By employing neurophysiological approaches in the lateral line system of A. mexicanus for the first time, we show that elevated lateral line afferent activity and loss of efferent function have repeatedly evolved together across cavefish populations. Our findings come at a time when genetic tools in A. mexicanus enable brain-wide imaging and gene-editing based screening to identify candidate neural circuits and genes critical in the evolution of sensory systems (Jaggard et al., 2020; Warren et al., 2021). Going forward, applying genetic and electrophysiological tools in well-characterized neural circuits promises to inform our understanding of the evolution of neural systems and behavior more broadly.

Electrophysiology data generated and analyzed during this study are included as a supplementary file ('Supplementary File 1').

1. 1. Atasavun Uysal S
   2. Erden Z
   3. Akbayrak T
   4. Demirtürk F

   (2010) Comparison of balance and gait in visually or hearing impaired children

   Perceptual and Motor Skills 111:71–80.

   https://doi.org/10.2466/10.11.15.25.PMS.111.4.71-80

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
2. Report

   1. Auguie B
   2. Antonov A
   3. Auguie MB

   (2017)

   Package ‘gridExtra

   Miscellaneous Functions for “Grid” Graphics.

   • Google Scholar
3. 1. Baty F
   2. Ritz C
   3. Charles S
   4. Brutsche M
   5. Flandrois JP
   6. Delignette-Muller ML

   (2015) A toolbox for nonlinear regression in R: The package nlstools

   Journal of Statistical Software 66:1–21.

   https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v066.i05

   • Google Scholar
4. 1. Bleckmann H
   2. Breithaupt T
   3. Blickhan R
   4. Tautz J

   (1991) The time course and frequency content of hydrodynamic events caused by moving fish, frogs, and crustaceans

   Journal of Comparative Physiology. A, Sensory, Neural, and Behavioral Physiology 168:749–757.

   https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00224363

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
5. 1. Blin M
   2. Tine E
   3. Meister L
   4. Elipot Y
   5. Bibliowicz J
   6. Espinasa L
   7. Rétaux S

   (2018) Developmental evolution and developmental plasticity of the olfactory epithelium and olfactory skills in Mexican cavefish

   Developmental Biology 441:242–251.

   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ydbio.2018.04.019

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
6. 1. Bradic M
   2. Beerli P
   3. García-de León FJ
   4. Esquivel-Bobadilla S
   5. Borowsky RL

   (2012) Gene flow and population structure in the Mexican blind cavefish complex (Astyanax mexicanus)

   BMC Evolutionary Biology 12:9.

   https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2148-12-9

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
7. 1. Breheny P
   2. Burchett W

   (2017) Visualization of Regression Models Using visreg

   The R Journal 9:56.

   https://doi.org/10.32614/RJ-2017-046

   • Google Scholar
8. 1. Chin JSR
   2. Gassant CE
   3. Amaral PM
   4. Lloyd E
   5. Stahl BA
   6. Jaggard JB
   7. Keene AC
   8. Duboue ER

   (2018) Convergence on reduced stress behavior in the Mexican blind cavefish

   Developmental Biology 441:319–327.

   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ydbio.2018.05.009

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
9. 1. Costa Sampaio F
   2. Santos Pompeu P
   3. de Andrade e Santos H
   4. Lopes Ferreira R

   (2012) Swimming performance of epigeal and hypogeal species of Characidae, with an emphasis on the troglobiotic Stygichthys typhlops Brittan & Böhlke, 1965

   International Journal of Speleology 41:9–16.

   https://doi.org/10.5038/1827-806X.41.1.2

   • Google Scholar
10. 1. Crapse TB
    2. Sommer MA

    (2008) Corollary discharge across the animal kingdom

    Nature Reviews Neuroscience 9:587–600.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2457

    • Google Scholar
11. 1. Dawkins R
    2. Keller SL
    3. Sewell WF

    (2005) Pharmacology of acetylcholine-mediated cell signaling in the lateral line organ following efferent stimulation

    Journal of Neurophysiology 93:2541–2551.

    https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.01283.2004

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
12. 1. de Perera TB

    (2004) Fish can encode order in their spatial map

    Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B 271:2131–2134.

    https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2004.2867

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
13. 1. Dickson DH
    2. Collard TR

    (1979) Retinal development in the lamprey (Petromyzon marinus L.): premetamorphic ammocoete eye

    The American Journal of Anatomy 154:321–336.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/aja.1001540303

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
14. 1. Dowling TE
    2. Martasian DP
    3. Jeffery WR

    (2002) Evidence for multiple genetic forms with similar eyeless phenotypes in the blind cavefish, Astyanax mexicanus

    Molecular Biology and Evolution 19:446–455.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a004100

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
15. 1. Duboué ER
    2. Keene AC
    3. Borowsky RL

    (2011) Evolutionary Convergence on Sleep Loss in Cavefish Populations

    Current Biology 21:671–676.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2011.03.020

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
16. 1. Espinasa L
    2. Legendre L
    3. Fumey J
    4. Blin M
    5. Rétaux S
    6. Espinasa M

    (2018) A new cave locality for Astyanax cavefish in Sierra de El Abra, Mexico

    Subterranean Biology 26:39–53.

    https://doi.org/10.3897/subtbiol.26.26643

    • Google Scholar
17. 1. Fernholm B
    2. Holmberg K

    (1975) The eyes in three genera of hagfish (Eptatretus, Paramyxine and Myxine)--A case of degenerative evolution

    Vision Research 15:253–259.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/0042-6989(75)90215-1

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
18. 1. Flock Å
    2. Russell IJ

    (1973) The post-synaptic action of efferent fibres in the lateral line organ of the burbot Lota lota

    The Journal of Physiology 235:591–605.

    https://doi.org/10.1113/jphysiol.1973.sp010406

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
19. Book

    1. Fox J
    2. Weisberg S

    (2018)

    An R Companion to Applied Regression

    Sage publications.

    • Google Scholar
20. Book

    1. Hassan ES

    (1989) Hydrodynamic imaging of the surroundings by the lateral line of the blind cave fish Anoptichthys jordani

    In: Hassan ES, editors. In The Mechanosensory Lateral Line. Springer. pp. 217–227.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-3560-6_10

    • Google Scholar
21. 1. Hedwig B

    (2006) Pulses, patterns and paths: neurobiology of acoustic behaviour in crickets

    Journal of Comparative Physiology A 192:677–689.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/s00359-006-0115-8

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
22. 1. Herman A
    2. Brandvain Y
    3. Weagley J
    4. Jeffery WR
    5. Keene AC
    6. Kono TJY
    7. Bilandžija H
    8. Borowsky R
    9. Espinasa L
    10. O’Quin K
    11. Ornelas-García CP
    12. Yoshizawa M
    13. Carlson B
    14. Maldonado E
    15. Gross JB
    16. Cartwright RA
    17. Rohner N
    18. Warren WC
    19. McGaugh SE

    (2018) The role of gene flow in rapid and repeated evolution of cave-related traits in Mexican tetra, Astyanax mexicanus

    Molecular Ecology 27:4397–4416.

    https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.14877

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
23. 1. Hoke K
    2. Schwartz A
    3. Soares D

    (2012) Evolution of the fast start response in the cavefish Astyanax mexicanus

    Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 66:1157–1164.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-012-1368-6

    • Google Scholar
24. 1. Hüppop K

    (1987) Food-finding ability in cave fish (Astyanax fasciatus

    International Journal of Speleology 16:59–66.

    https://doi.org/10.5038/1827-806X.16.1.4

    • Google Scholar
25. 1. Jaggard J
    2. Robinson BG
    3. Stahl BA
    4. Oh I
    5. Masek P
    6. Yoshizawa M
    7. Keene AC

    (2017) The lateral line confers evolutionarily derived sleep loss in the Mexican cavefish

    The Journal of Experimental Biology 220:284–293.

    https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.145128

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
26. 1. Jaggard JB
    2. Stahl BA
    3. Lloyd E
    4. Prober DA
    5. Duboue ER
    6. Keene AC

    (2018) Hypocretin underlies the evolution of sleep loss in the Mexican cavefish

    eLife 7:e32637.

    https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.32637

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
27. 1. Jaggard JB
    2. Lloyd E
    3. Yuiska A
    4. Patch A
    5. Fily Y
    6. Kowalko JE
    7. Appelbaum L
    8. Duboue ER
    9. Keene AC

    (2020) Cavefish brain atlases reveal functional and anatomical convergence across independently evolved populations

    Science Advances 6:eaba3126.

    https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aba3126

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
28. 1. Jourjine N
    2. Hoekstra HE

    (2021) Expanding evolutionary neuroscience: insights from comparing variation in behavior

    Neuron 109:1084–1099.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2021.02.002

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
29. 1. Kelley JL
    2. Chapuis L
    3. Davies WIL
    4. Collin SP

    (2018) Sensory System Responses to Human-Induced Environmental Change

    Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution 6:00095.

    https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2018.00095

    • Google Scholar
30. Book

    1. Kiang NYS

    (1965)

    Discharge Patterns of Single Fibers in the Cat’s Auditory Nerve

    MASSACHUSETTS INST OF TECH CAMBRIDGE RESEARCH LAB OF ELECTRONICS.

    • Google Scholar
31. 1. Kishida R
    2. Goris RC
    3. Nishizawa H
    4. Koyama H
    5. Kadota T
    6. Amemiya F

    (1987) Primary neurons of the lateral line nerves and their central projections in hagfishes

    The Journal of Comparative Neurology 264:303–310.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/cne.902640303

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
32. 1. Köppl C

    (1997) Frequency tuning and spontaneous activity in the auditory nerve and cochlear nucleus magnocellularis of the barn owl Tyto alba

    Journal of Neurophysiology 77:364–377.

    https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.1997.77.1.364

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
33. Book

    1. Köppl C

    (2011) Evolution of the octavolateral efferent system

    In: Köppl C, editors. In Auditory and Vestibular Efferents. Springer. pp. 217–259.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-7070-1_8

    • Google Scholar
34. 1. Kowalko J

    (2020) Utilizing the blind cavefish Astyanax mexicanus to understand the genetic basis of behavioral evolution

    The Journal of Experimental Biology 223:jeb208835.

    https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.208835

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
35. 1. Koyama H
    2. Kishida R
    3. Goris RC
    4. Kusunoki T

    (1990) Organization of the primary projections of the lateral line nerves in the lamprey Lampetra japonica

    The Journal of Comparative Neurology 295:277–289.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/cne.902950210

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
36. 1. Krasne FB
    2. Bryan JS

    (1973) Habituation: regulation through presynaptic inhibition

    Science (New York, N.Y.) 182:590–592.

    https://doi.org/10.1126/science.182.4112.590

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
37. 1. Levi R
    2. Akanyeti O
    3. Ballo A
    4. Liao JC

    (2015) Frequency response properties of primary afferent neurons in the posterior lateral line system of larval zebrafish

    Journal of Neurophysiology 113:657–668.

    https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00414.2014

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
38. 1. Liu KS
    2. Fetcho JR

    (1999) Laser ablations reveal functional relationships of segmental hindbrain neurons in zebrafish

    Neuron 23:325–335.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/s0896-6273(00)80783-7

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
39. 1. Lloyd E
    2. Olive C
    3. Stahl BA
    4. Jaggard JB
    5. Amaral P
    6. Duboué ER
    7. Keene AC

    (2018) Evolutionary shift towards lateral line dependent prey capture behavior in the blind Mexican cavefish

    Developmental Biology 441:328–337.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ydbio.2018.04.027

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
40. 1. Lunsford ET
    2. Skandalis DA
    3. Liao JC

    (2019) Efferent modulation of spontaneous lateral line activity during and after zebrafish motor commands

    Journal of Neurophysiology 122:2438–2448.

    https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00594.2019

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
41. 1. Lunsford ET
    2. Liao JC

    (2021) Activity of Posterior Lateral Line Afferent Neurons during Swimming in Zebrafish

    Journal of Visualized Experiments 168:e62233.

    https://doi.org/10.3791/62233

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
42. 1. Manley GA
    2. Robertson D

    (1976) Analysis of spontaneous activity of auditory neurones in the spiral ganglion of the guinea-pig cochlea

    The Journal of Physiology 258:323–336.

    https://doi.org/10.1113/jphysiol.1976.sp011422

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
43. 1. Masino MA
    2. Fetcho JR

    (2005) Fictive swimming motor patterns in wild type and mutant larval zebrafish

    Journal of Neurophysiology 93:3177–3188.

    https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.01248.2004

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
44. 1. McBride CS

    (2007) Rapid evolution of smell and taste receptor genes during host specialization in Drosophila sechellia

    PNAS 104:4996–5001.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0608424104

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
45. 1. McGaugh SE
    2. Kowalko JE
    3. Duboué E
    4. Lewis P
    5. Franz-Odendaal TA
    6. Rohner N
    7. Gross JB
    8. Keene AC

    (2020) Dark world rises: The emergence of cavefish as a model for the study of evolution, development, behavior, and disease

    Journal of Experimental Zoology. Part B, Molecular and Developmental Evolution 334:397–404.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/jez.b.22978

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
46. 1. McHenry MJ
    2. Strother JA
    3. van Netten SM

    (2008) Mechanical filtering by the boundary layer and fluid-structure interaction in the superficial neuromast of the fish lateral line system

    Journal of Comparative Physiology. A, Neuroethology, Sensory, Neural, and Behavioral Physiology 194:795–810.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/s00359-008-0350-2

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
47. 1. McHenry MJ
    2. Feitl KE
    3. Strother JA
    4. Van Trump WJ

    (2009) Larval zebrafish rapidly sense the water flow of a predator’s strike

    Biology Letters 5:477–479.

    https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2009.0048

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
48. 1. Mekdara PJ
    2. Schwalbe MAB
    3. Coughlin LL
    4. Tytell ED

    (2018) The effects of lateral line ablation and regeneration in schooling giant danios

    The Journal of Experimental Biology 221:jeb175166.

    https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.175166

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
49. 1. Mirat O
    2. Sternberg JR
    3. Severi KE
    4. Wyart C

    (2013) ZebraZoom: an automated program for high-throughput behavioral analysis and categorization

    Frontiers in Neural Circuits 7:107.

    https://doi.org/10.3389/fncir.2013.00107

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
50. Report

    1. Mitchell RW
    2. Russell W
    3. Elliot W

    (1997) Mexican eyeless characin fishes, genus Astyanax: Environment, distribution, and evolution

    Texas Tech Press.

    https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Mexican%20eyeless%20characin%20fishes%2C%20genus%20Astyanax%3A%20environment%2C%20distribution%2C%20and%20evolution.%2C%20Special%20publications%20the%20museum%20Texas%20Tech%20University&author=R.W.%20Mitchell&publication_year=1977

    • Google Scholar
51. 1. Mohr C
    2. Roberts PD
    3. Bell CC

    (2003) The mormyromast region of the mormyrid electrosensory lobe. I. Responses to corollary discharge and electrosensory stimuli

    Journal of Neurophysiology 90:1193–1210.

    https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00211.2003

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
52. 1. Montgomery JC
    2. Bodznick D

    (1994) An adaptive filter that cancels self-induced noise in the electrosensory and lateral line mechanosensory systems of fish

    Neuroscience Letters 174:145–148.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3940(94)90007-8

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
53. 1. Montgomery J
    2. Bodznick D
    3. Halstead M

    (1996) Hindbrain signal processing in the lateral line system of the dwarf scorpionfish Scopeana papillosus

    The Journal of Experimental Biology 199:893–899.

    https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.199.4.893

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
54. 1. Nakamura T

    (1997) Quantitative analysis of gait in the visually impaired

    Disability and Rehabilitation 19:194–197.

    https://doi.org/10.3109/09638289709166526

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
55. 1. Odstrcil I
    2. Petkova MD
    3. Haesemeyer M
    4. Boulanger-Weill J
    5. Nikitchenko M
    6. Gagnon JA
    7. Oteiza P
    8. Schalek R
    9. Peleg A
    10. Portugues R
    11. Lichtman JW
    12. Engert F

    (2022) Functional and ultrastructural analysis of reafferent mechanosensation in larval zebrafish

    Current Biology 32:176–189.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2021.11.007

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
56. 1. Olszewski J
    2. Haehnel M
    3. Taguchi M
    4. Liao JC

    (2012) Zebrafish larvae exhibit rheotaxis and can escape a continuous suction source using their lateral line

    PLOS ONE 7:e36661.

    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0036661

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
57. 1. Oteiza P
    2. Odstrcil I
    3. Lauder G
    4. Portugues R
    5. Engert F

    (2017) A novel mechanism for mechanosensory-based rheotaxis in larval zebrafish

    Nature 547:445–448.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nature23014

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
58. 1. Patton P
    2. Windsor S
    3. Coombs S

    (2010) Active wall following by Mexican blind cavefish (Astyanax mexicanus

    Journal of Comparative Physiology. A, Neuroethology, Sensory, Neural, and Behavioral Physiology 196:853–867.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/s00359-010-0567-8

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
59. 1. Paz A
    2. McDole B
    3. Kowalko JE
    4. Duboue ER
    5. Keene AC

    (2020) Evolution of the acoustic startle response of Mexican cavefish

    Journal of Experimental Zoology. Part B, Molecular and Developmental Evolution 334:474–485.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/jez.b.22988

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
60. 1. Pichler P
    2. Lagnado L

    (2020) Motor Behavior Selectively Inhibits Hair Cells Activated by Forward Motion in the Lateral Line of Zebrafish

    Current Biology 30:150–157.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2019.11.020

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
61. 1. Reinig S
    2. Driever W
    3. Arrenberg AB

    (2017) The Descending Diencephalic Dopamine System Is Tuned to Sensory Stimuli

    Current Biology 27:318–333.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2016.11.059

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
62. 1. Riddle MR
    2. Aspiras AC
    3. Gaudenz K
    4. Peuß R
    5. Sung JY
    6. Martineau B
    7. Peavey M
    8. Box AC
    9. Tabin JA
    10. McGaugh S
    11. Borowsky R
    12. Tabin CJ
    13. Rohner N

    (2018) Insulin resistance in cavefish as an adaptation to a nutrient-limited environment

    Nature 555:647–651.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nature26136

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
63. 1. Roberts BL
    2. Russell IJ

    (1972) The activity of lateral-line efferent neurones in stationary and swimming dogfish

    The Journal of Experimental Biology 57:435–448.

    https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.57.2.435

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
64. 1. Russell IJ
    2. Roberts BL

    (1972) Inhibition of Spontaneous Lateral-Line Activity by Efferent Nerve Stimulation

    Journal of Experimental Biology 57:77–82.

    https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.57.1.77

    • Google Scholar
65. 1. Santos F
    2. MacDonald G
    3. Rubel EW
    4. Raible DW

    (2006) Lateral line hair cell maturation is a determinant of aminoglycoside susceptibility in zebrafish (Danio rerio)

    Hearing Research 213:25–33.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2005.12.009

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
66. 1. Sharma S
    2. Coombs S
    3. Patton P
    4. Burt de Perera T

    (2009) The function of wall-following behaviors in the Mexican blind cavefish and a sighted relative, the Mexican tetra (Astyanax)

    Journal of Comparative Physiology. A, Neuroethology, Sensory, Neural, and Behavioral Physiology 195:225–240.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/s00359-008-0400-9

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
67. 1. Skandalis DA
    2. Lunsford ET
    3. Liao JC

    (2021) Corollary discharge enables proprioception from lateral line sensory feedback

    PLOS Biology 19:e3001420.

    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3001420

    • Google Scholar
68. 1. Soustelle L
    2. Aigouy B
    3. Asensio ML
    4. Giangrande A

    (2008) UV laser mediated cell selective destruction by confocal microscopy

    Neural Development 3:11.

    https://doi.org/10.1186/1749-8104-3-11

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
69. 1. Stewart WJ
    2. Cardenas GS
    3. McHenry MJ

    (2013) Zebrafish larvae evade predators by sensing water flow

    Journal of Experimental Biology 216:388–398.

    https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.072751

    • Google Scholar
70. 1. Stockdale WT
    2. Lemieux ME
    3. Killen AC
    4. Zhao J
    5. Hu Z
    6. Riepsaame J
    7. Hamilton N
    8. Kudoh T
    9. Riley PR
    10. van Aerle R
    11. Yamamoto Y
    12. Mommersteeg MTM

    (2018) Heart Regeneration in the Mexican Cavefish

    Cell Reports 25:1997–2007.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2018.10.072

    • Google Scholar
71. 1. Straka H
    2. Simmers J
    3. Chagnaud BP

    (2018) A New Perspective on Predictive Motor Signaling

    Current Biology 28:R232–R243.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2018.01.033

    • Google Scholar
72. 1. Tan D
    2. Patton P
    3. Coombs S

    (2011) Do blind cavefish have behavioral specializations for active flow-sensing?

    Journal of Comparative Physiology. A, Neuroethology, Sensory, Neural, and Behavioral Physiology 197:743–754.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/s00359-011-0637-6

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
73. 1. Teyke T

    (1985) Collision with and avoidance of obstacles by blind cave fish Anoptichthys jordani (Characidae

    Journal of Comparative Physiology. A, Sensory, Neural, and Behavioral Physiology 157:837–843.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01350081

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
74. 1. Teyke T

    (1990) Morphological differences in neuromasts of the blind cave fish Astyanax hubbsi and the sighted river fish Astyanax mexicanus

    Brain, Behavior and Evolution 35:23–30.

    https://doi.org/10.1159/000115853

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
75. 1. Trapani JG
    2. Nicolson T

    (2011) Mechanism of spontaneous activity in afferent neurons of the zebrafish lateral-line organ

    The Journal of Neuroscience 31:1614–1623.

    https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3369-10.2011

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
76. 1. Tricas TC
    2. Highstein SM

    (1991) Action of the octavolateralis efferent system upon the lateral line of free-swimming toadfish, Opsanus tau

    Journal of Comparative Physiology. A, Sensory, Neural, and Behavioral Physiology 169:25–37.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00198170

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
77. 1. Van Trump WJ
    2. Coombs S
    3. Duncan K
    4. McHenry MJ

    (2010) Gentamicin is ototoxic to all hair cells in the fish lateral line system

    Hearing Research 261:42–50.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heares.2010.01.001

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
78. 1. Varatharasan N
    2. Croll RP
    3. Franz-Odendaal T

    (2009) Taste bud development and patterning in sighted and blind morphs of Astyanax mexicanus

    Developmental Dynamics 238:3056–3064.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/dvdy.22144

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
79. 1. von Campenhausen C
    2. Riess I
    3. Weissert R

    (1981) Detection of stationary objects by the blind Cave FishAnoptichthys jordani (Characidae

    Journal of Comparative Physiology 143:369–374.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00611175

    • Google Scholar
80. 1. Warren WC
    2. Boggs TE
    3. Borowsky R
    4. Carlson BM
    5. Ferrufino E
    6. Gross JB
    7. Hillier L
    8. Hu Z
    9. Keene AC
    10. Kenzior A
    11. Kowalko JE
    12. Tomlinson C
    13. Kremitzki M
    14. Lemieux ME
    15. Graves-Lindsay T
    16. McGaugh SE
    17. Miller JT
    18. Mommersteeg MTM
    19. Moran RL
    20. Peuß R
    21. Rice ES
    22. Riddle MR
    23. Sifuentes-Romero I
    24. Stanhope BA
    25. Tabin CJ
    26. Thakur S
    27. Yamamoto Y
    28. Rohner N

    (2021) A chromosome-level genome of Astyanax mexicanus surface fish for comparing population-specific genetic differences contributing to trait evolution

    Nature Communications 12:1–12.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-21733-z

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
81. 1. Wickham H

    (2007) Reshaping Data with the reshape Package

    Journal of Statistical Software 21:12.

    https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v021.i12

    • Google Scholar
82. 1. Wickham H

    (2011) The Split-Apply-Combine Strategy for Data Analysis

    Journal of Statistical Software 40:i01.

    https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v040.i01

    • Google Scholar
83. Software

    1. Wickham H
    2. François R
    3. Henry L
    4. Müller K

    (2019)

    dplyr: A Grammar of Data Manipulation

    R Package Version.
84. Software

    1. Wilke CO

    (2019)

    cowplot: Streamlined plot theme and plot annotations for ‘ggplot2

    R Package Version.
85. 1. Windsor SP
    2. Tan D
    3. Montgomery JC

    (2008) Swimming kinematics and hydrodynamic imaging in the blind Mexican cave fish (Astyanax fasciatus)

    The Journal of Experimental Biology 211:2950–2959.

    https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.020453

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
86. 1. Yamamoto Y
    2. Byerly MS
    3. Jackman WR
    4. Jeffery WR

    (2009) Pleiotropic functions of embryonic sonic hedgehog expression link jaw and taste bud amplification with eye loss during cavefish evolution

    Developmental Biology 330:200–211.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ydbio.2009.03.003

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
87. 1. Yoffe M
    2. Patel K
    3. Palia E
    4. Kolawole S
    5. Streets A
    6. Haspel G
    7. Soares D

    (2020) Morphological malleability of the lateral line allows for surface fish (Astyanax mexicanus) adaptation to cave environments

    Journal of Experimental Zoology Part B 334:511–517.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/jez.b.22953

    • Google Scholar
88. 1. Yoshizawa M
    2. Goricki S
    3. Soares D
    4. Jeffery WR

    (2010) Evolution of a behavioral shift mediated by superficial neuromasts helps cavefish find food in darkness

    Current Biology 20:1631–1636.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2010.07.017

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
89. 1. Yoshizawa M
    2. Yamamoto Y
    3. O’Quin KE
    4. Jeffery WR

    (2012) Evolution of an adaptive behavior and its sensory receptors promotes eye regression in blind cavefish

    BMC Biology 10:1–16.

    https://doi.org/10.1186/1741-7007-10-108

    • Google Scholar
90. 1. Yoshizawa M
    2. Jeffery WR
    3. van Netten SM
    4. McHenry MJ

    (2014) The sensitivity of lateral line receptors and their role in the behavior of Mexican blind cavefish (Astyanax mexicanus)

    The Journal of Experimental Biology 217:886–895.

    https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.094599

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar

Author details

1. Elias T Lunsford

   Department of Biology, University of Florida, Saint Augustine, United States

   Contribution

   Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Visualization, Writing - original draft, Writing – review and editing

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

   "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3713-6994

2. Alexandra Paz

   Department of Biological Sciences, Florida Atlantic University, Jupiter, United States

   Contribution

   Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – review and editing

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

3. Alex C Keene

   Texas A&M University, College Station, United States

   Contribution

   Funding acquisition, Resources, Writing – review and editing

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

4. James C Liao

   Department of Biology, University of Florida, Saint Augustine, United States

   Contribution

   Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Supervision, Validation, Writing – review and editing

   For correspondence

   jliao@whitney.ufl.edu

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

   "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0181-6995

• 1,360

  views

• 266

  downloads

• 12

  citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.