Indirect fitness benefits are not related to male dominance in a killifish

Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

Volumn 63, Issue 10, 2009, Pages 1427-1435

  Polačik, Matej ^a   Reichard, Martin ^a,b  

^a INSTITUTE OF VERTEBRATE BIOLOGY   (Czech Republic)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEICESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Additive genetic benefits; Female preference; Good genes; Sequential mate choice; Sexual selection

Indexed keywords

AGE DETERMINATION; BODY SIZE; DOMINANCE; EGG SIZE; FITNESS; GENE; HATCHING; MALE BEHAVIOR; MATE CHOICE; PARENTAL CARE; SEXUAL SELECTION; SPERM; TELEOST;

CYPRINODONTIFORMES; CYPRINODONTOIDEI; NOTHOBRANCHIUS;

EID: 70349984720     PISSN: 03405443     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00265-009-0798-2     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Alatalo RV, Lundberg A, Glynn C (1986) Female pied flycatchers choose territory quality and not male characteristics. Nature 323:152-153.
2. Amundsen T (2003) Fishes as models in studies of sexual selection and parental care. J Fish Biol 63(Suppl A):17-52.
3. Andersson M (1994) Sexual selection. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
4. Arnqvist G, Lowe R (2005) Sexual conflict. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
5. Barber I, Arnott SA, Braithwaite VA, Andrew J, Huntingford FA (2001) Indirect fitness consequences of mate choice in sticklebacks: Offspring of brighter males grow slowly but resist parasite infections. Proc R Soc Lond B 268:71-76.
6. Candolin U (1999) Male-male competition facilitates female choice in sticklebacks. Proc R Soc Lond B 266:785-789.
7. Candolin U (2001) Male-male competition ensures honest signaling of male parental ability in the three-spined stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 49:57-61.
8. Candolin U (2004) Opposing selection on a sexually dimorphic trait through female choice and male competition in a water boatman. Evolution 58:1861-1864.
9. Casalini M, Agbali M, Reichard M, Konečná M, Bryjová A, Smith C (2009) Male dominance, female choice and intersexual conflict in the rose bitterling (Rhodeus ocellatus). Evolution 63:366-376.
10. Clutton-Brock TH, Parker GA (1995) Sexual coercion in animal societies. Anim Behav 49:1345-1365.
11. Côte IM, Hunte W (1989) Male and female mate choice in the redlip blenny: Why bigger is better. Anim Behav 38:78-88.
12. De Fraipont M, FitzGerald GJ, Guderlay H (1993) Age-related differences in reproductive tactics in the three-spined stickleback, Gasterosteus aculeatus. Anim Behav 46:961-968.
13. Dziminski MA, Roberts JD, Simmons LW (2008) Fitness consequences of parental compatibility in the frog Crinia georgiana. Evolution 62:879-886.
14. Eaton RC, Farley RD (1974) Spawning cycle and egg production of zebrafish, Brachydanio rerio, in the laboratory. Copeia 1974:195-204.
15. Eberhard WG (1996) Female control: Sexual selection by cryptic female choice. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
16. Engqvist L (2007) Sex, food and conflicts: Nutrition dependent nuptial feeding and pre-mating struggles in scorpionflies. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 61:703-710.
17. Genade T, Benedetti M, Terzibasi E, Roncaglia P, Valenzano DR, Cattaneo R, Cellerino A (2005) Annual fishes of the genus Nothobranchius as a model system for aging research. Aging Cell 4:223-233.
18. Haas R (1976a) Behavioral biology of the annual killifish, Nothobranchius guentheri. Copeia 1976:81-91.
19. Haas R (1976b) Sexual selection in Nothobranchius guentheri (Pisces: Cyprinidontidae). Evolution 30:614-622.
20. Head ML, Hunt J, Jennions MD, Brooks R (2005) The indirect benefits of mating with attractive males outweigh the direct costs. PLoS Biol 3:e33.
21. Houde AE (1997) Sex, color, and mate choice in guppies. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
22. Huber JH (2000) Killi-Data 2000. Updated checklist of taxonomic names, collecting localities and bibliographic references of oviparous Cyprinodont fishes (Cyprinodontiformes). Cybium, Paris.
23. Jacob A, Nusslé S, Britschgi A, Evanno G, Müller R, Wedekind C (2007) Male dominance linked to size and age, but not to 'good genes' in brown trout (Salmo trutta). BMC Evol Biol 7:207.
24. Kangas N, Lindström K (2001) Male interaction and female mate choice in the sand goby, Pomatoschistus minutes. Anim Behav 61:425-430.
25. Kokko H (2005) Treat 'em mean, keep 'em (sometimes) keen: Evolution of female preferences for dominant and coercive males. Evol Ecol 19:123-135.
26. Kokko H, Jennions MD, Brooks R (2006) Unifying and testing models of sexual selection. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 37:43-66.
27. Kolm N (2001) Females produce larger eggs for large males in a paternal mouthbrooding fish. Proc R Soc Lond B 268:2229-2234.
28. Kolm N, Olsson J (2003) Rapid matching of egg size to mate attractiveness in the Banggai cardinalfish. J Fish Biol 63:144-151.
29. Kortet R, Vainikka A, Rantala MJ, Myntti J, Taskinen J (2004) In vitro embryo survival and early viability of larvae in relation to male sexual ornaments and parasite resistance in roach, Rutilus rutilus L. J Evol Biol 17:1337-1344.
30. Mank JE, Avise JC (2006) The evolution of reproductive and genomic diversity in ray-finned fishes: Insights from phylogeny and comparative analysis. J Fish Biol 69:1-27.
31. Milinski M, Bakker TCM (1990) Female sticklebacks use male colouration in mate choice and hence avoid parasitized males. Nature 344:330-333.
32. Møller AP, Alatalo RV (1999) Good-genes effects in sexual selection. Proc R Soc Lond B 266:85-91.
33. Nakagawa S, Cuthill IC (2007) Effect size, confidence interval and statistical significance: A practical guide for biologists. Biol Rev 82:591-605.
34. Nakatsuru K, Kramer DL (1982) Is sperm cheap? Limited male fertility and female choice in the lemon tetra (Pisces, Characidae). Science 216:753-755.
35. Neff BD, Pitcher TE (2005) Genetic quality and sexual selection: An integrated framework for good genes and compatible genes. Mol Ecol 14:19-38.
36. Ophir AG, Galef BG Jr (2003) Female Japanese quail that 'eavesdrop' on fighting males prefer losers to winners. Anim Behav 66:399-407.
37. Pitcher TE, Neff BD (2006) MHC class IIB alleles contribute to both additive and non-additive genetic effects on survival in Chinook salmon. Mol Ecol 15:2357-2365.
38. Pitcher TE, Neff BD, Rodd FH, Rowe L (2003) Multiple mating and sequential mate choice in guppies: Females trade up. Proc R Soc Lond B 260:1623-1629.
39. Preston BT, Stevenson IR, Pemberton JM, Wilson K (2001) Dominant rams lose out by sperm depletion. Nature 409:681-682.
40. Qvarnström A (1997) Experimentally increased badge size increases male competition and reduces male parental care in the collared flycatcher. Proc R Soc Lond B 264:1225-1231.
41. Qvarnström A, Forsgren E (1998) Should female prefer dominant males? Trends Ecol Evol 13:498-503.
42. Reichard M, Bryja J, Ondračková M, Dávidová M, Kaniewska P, Smith C (2005) Sexual selection for male dominance reduces opportunities for female mate choice in the European bitterling (Rhodeus sericeus). Mol Ecol 14:1533-1542.
43. Reichard M, Le Comber SC, Smith C (2007) Sneaking from a female perspective. Anim Behav 74:679-688.
44. Reichard M, Polačik M, Sedláček O (2009) Distribution, colour polymorphism and habitat use of the African killifish, Nothobranchius furzeri, the vertebrate with the shortest lifespan. J Fish Biol 74:198-212.
45. Rudolfsen G, Figenshou L, Folstad I, Nordeide JT, Søreng E (2005) Potential fitness benefits from mate selection in the Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua). J Evol Biol 18:172-179.
46. Smith C, Douglas A, Jurajda P (2002) Sexual conflict, sexual selection and sperm competition in the spawning decisions of bitterling, Rhodeus sericeus. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 51:433-439.
47. Spence R, Smith C (2006) Mating preference of female zebrafish, Danio rerio, in relation to male dominance. Behav Ecol 17:779-783.
48. Valdesalici S, Cellerino A (2003) Extremely short lifespan in the annual fish Nothobranchius furzeri. Proc R Soc Lond B 279:S189-S191.
49. Warner RR (1987) Female choice of sites versus mates in a coral reef fish, Thalassoma bifasciatum. Anim Behav 35:1470-1478.
50. Warner RR, Shapiro DY, Marcanato A, Petersen CW (1995) Sexual conflict-males with the highest mating success convey the lowest fertilization benefits to females. Proc R Soc Lond B 262:135-139.
51. Watters JV (2005) Can alternative male tactics 'fighter' and 'sneaker' be considered 'coercer' and 'cooperator'? Anim Behav 70:1055-1062.
52. Wedekind C, Muller R, Spicher H (2001) Potential genetic benefits of mate selection in whitefish. J Evol Biol 14:980-986.
53. Welch AM, Semlitch RD, Gerhardt HC (1998) Call duration as an indicator of genetic duality in male gray tree frogs. Science 280:1928-1930.
54. Wildekamp RH (2004) A world of killies: Atlas of the oviparous cyprinidontiform fishes of the world, volume IV. American Killifish Association, Elyria.