Changes in sexual selection resulting from novel habitat use in the sand goby

Oikos

Volumn 104, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 327-335

  Lehtonen, Topi ^a   Lindström, Kai ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI   (Finland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

FISH; HABITAT USE; HARD-BOTTOM ENVIRONMENT; NEST SITE; REPRODUCTIVE STRATEGY; RESOURCE AVAILABILITY; SEXUAL SELECTION; SOFT-BOTTOM ENVIRONMENT;

CALLOGOBIUS ATRATUS; GOBIIDAE; KRAEMERIIDAE; PISCES; POMATOSCHISTUS MINUTUS;

EID: 0942289148     PISSN: 00301299     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.0030-1299.2004.12489.x     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Ahnesjö, I., Kvarnemo, C. and Merilaita, S. 2001. Using potential reproductive rates to predict mating competition among individuals qualified to mate. - Behav. Ecol. 12: 397-401.
2. Andersson, M. 1994. Sexual selection. - Princeton Univ. Press.
3. Arnold, S. J. and Wade, M. J. 1984. On the measurement of natural and sexual selection: theory. - Evolution 38: 709-719.
4. Bisazza, A. and Marconato, A. 1988. Female mate choice, male-male competition and parental care in the river bullhead, Cottus gobio L. (Pisces, Cottidae). - Anim. Behav. 36: 1352-1360.
5. Bougham, J. W. 2001. Divergent sexual selection enhances reproductive isolation in sticklebacks. - Nature 411: 944-948.
6. Breitburg, D. L. 1987. Interspecific competition and the abundance of nest sites: factors affecting sexual selection. - Ecology 68: 1844-1855.
7. Conover, W. J. 1971. Practical non-parametric statistics. - John Wiley & Sons.
8. Côté, I. M. and Hunte, W. 1989. Male and female mate choice in the redlip blenny. Why big is better. - Anim. Behav. 38: 78-88.
9. Dieckmann, U. and Doebeli, M. 1999. On the origin of species by sympatric speciation. - Nature 400: 354-357.
10. Downhower, J. F. and Brown, L. 1980. Mate preferences of female mottled sculpins, Cottus bairdii. - Anim. Behav. 28: 728-734.
11. Emlen, S. T. and Oring, L. W. 1977. Ecology, sexual selection, and the evolution of mating systems. - Science 197: 215-223.
12. Forsgren, E., Kvarnemo, C. and Lindström, K. 1996. Mode of sexual selection determined by resource abundance in two sand goby populations. - Evolution 50: 646-654.
13. Fretwell, S. D. 1972. Populations in a seasonal environment. - Princeton Univ. Press.
14. Gilliam, J. F. and Fraser, D. F. 1987. Habitat selection under predation hazard: test of a model with foraging minnows. - Ecology 68: 1856-1862.
15. Gwynne, D. T. 1984. Sexual selection and sexual differences in mormon crickets (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae, Anabrus simplex). - Evolution 38: 1011-1022.
16. Healey, M. C. 1971. Gonad development and fecundity of the sand goby, Gobius minutus Pallas. - Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 100: 520-526.
17. Hesthagen, I. H. 1979. Kutlinger av slekten Pomatoschistus som redebyggere. - Fauna 32: 52-56.
18. Jirotkul, M. 1999. Population density influences male-male competition in guppies. - Anim. Behav. 58: 1169-1175.
19. Jirotkul, M. 2000. Operational sex ratio influences the opportunity for sexual selection in guppies. - J. Fish Biol. 56: 739-741.
20. Jones, A. G., Walker, D., Kvarnemo, C. et al. 2001a. How cuckoldry can decrease the opportunity for sexual selection: Data and theory from a genetic parentage analysis of the sand goby, Pomatoschistus minutus. - Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 98: 9151-9156.
21. Jones, A. G., Walker, D., Lindström, K. et al. 2001b. Surprising similarity of sneaking rates and genetic mating patterns in two populations of the sand goby experiencing disparate sexual selection regimes. - Mol. Ecol. 10: 461-470.
22. Jordan, F., Bartolini, M., Nelson, C. et al. 1996. Risk of predation affects habitat selection by the pinfish Lagodon rhomboides (Linnaeus). - J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 208: 45-56.
23. Kvarnemo, C. 1995. Size-assortative nest choice in the absence of competition in males of the sand goby, Pomatoschistus minutus. - Environ. Biol. Fish. 43: 233-239.
24. Lindström, K. 1988. Male-male competition for nest sites in the sand goby, Pomatoschistus minutus. - Oikos 53: 67-73.
25. Lindström, K. 1992a. Female spawning patterns and male mating success in the sand goby Pomatoschistus minutus. - Mar. Biol. 113: 475-480.
26. Lindström, K. 1992b. The effect of resource holding potential, nest size, and information about resource quality on the outcome of intruder-owner conflicts in the sand goby. - Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 30: 53-58.
27. Lindström, K. 2001. Effects of resource distribution on sexual selection and the cost of reproduction in sandgobies. - Am. Nat. 158: 64-74.
28. Lindström, K. and Ranta, E. 1992. Predation by birds affects structure of breeding population in male sand gobies, Pomatoschistus minutus. - Oikos 64: 527-532.
29. Luyten, P. H. and Liley, N. R. 1985. Geographic variation in the sexual behaviour of the guppy, Poecilia reticulata (Peters). - Behaviour 95: 164-179.
30. Madsen, T. and Shine, R. 1993. Temporal variability in sexual selection acting on reproductive tactics and body size in male snakes. - Am. Nat. 141: 167-171.
31. Morris, D. W. 1987. Tests of density-dependent habitat selection in a patchy environment. - Ecol. Mono. 57: 269-281.
32. Morris, D. W., Fox, B. J., Luo, J. et al. 2000. Habitat-dependent competition and the coexistence of Australian heathland rodents. - Oikos 91: 294-306.
33. Mousseau, T. A. and Nichols, C. C. 1987. Polygyny and nest site abundance in the slimy sculpin (Cottus cognatus). - Can. J. Zool. 65: 2827-2829.
34. Nellbring, S. 1986. A quantitative and experimental study of goby (Pomatoschistus spp.) nests on a shallow soft bottom, Northern Baltic Proper. - Ophelia 25: 15-23.
35. Noltie, D. B. and Keenleyside, M. H. A. 1987. Breeding ecology, nest characteristics, and nest-site selection of stream-and lake-dwelling rock bass. Ambloplites rupestris (Rafinesque). - Can. J. Zool. 65: 379-390.
36. Oliveira, K., McCleave, J. D. and Wippelhauser, G. S. 2001. Regional variation and the effect of lake:river area on sex distribution of American eels. - J. Fish Biol. 58: 943-952.
37. Parker, G. A. and Sutherland, W. J. 1986. Ideal free distributions when individuals differ in competitive ability: phenotype-limited ideal free models. - Anim. Behav. 34: 1222-1242.
38. Partridge, L. 1978. Habitat selection. - In: Krebs, J. R. and Davies, N. B. (eds), Behavioural ecology: an evolutionary approach. Blackwell Scientific Publications, pp. 351-376.
39. Reynolds, J. D. 1996. Animal breeding systems. - Trends Ecol. Evol. 11: 68-72.
40. Rosenzweig, M. L. and Abramsky, Z. 1985. Detecting density-dependent habitat selection. - Am. Nat. 126: 405-417.
41. Sakai, A. K., Allendorf, F. W., Holt, J. S. et al. 2001. The population biology of invasive species. - Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 32: 305-332.
42. Via, S. 2001. Sympatric speciation in animals: the ugly duckling grows up. - Trends Ecol. Evol. 16: 381-390.
43. Werner, E. E. and Hall, D. J. 1976. Niche shifts in sunfishes: experimental evidence and significance. - Science 191: 404-406.
44. Werner, E. E., Gilliam, J. F., Hall, D. J. et al. 1983. An experimental test of the effects of predation risk on habitat use in fish. - Ecology 64: 1540-1548.
45. Wiederholm, A. M. 1987. Habitat selection and interactions between three marine fish species (Gobiidae). - Oikos 48: 28-32.
46. Zander, C. D. 1990. Habitat and prey dependent distribution of sand gobies, Pomatoschistus minutus (Gobiidae, Teleostei), in the SW Baltic. - Zool. Anz. 224: 328-341.