Male and female preference for conspecifics in a fish with male parental care (Percidae: Catonotus)

Behavioural Processes

Volumn 85, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 157-162

  O'Rourke, Cynthia F ^a   Mendelson, Tamra C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE COUNTY   (United States)

Author keywords

Behavioral isolation; Darter; Etheostoma; Female choice; Male choice; Speciation

Indexed keywords

BEHAVIORAL RESPONSE; COEVOLUTION; CONSPECIFIC; DIVERGENCE; ISOLATED POPULATION; MATE CHOICE; PARENTAL INVESTMENT; PERCIFORM; SEXUAL SELECTION; SPECIATION (BIOLOGY);

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ARTICLE; FEMALE; FISH; GENDER; GENE; GENE FLOW; INVESTMENT; MALE; MATE CHOICE; NONHUMAN; PARENTAL BEHAVIOR; SEXUAL SELECTION; SPECIES; STRENGTH;

ANIMALS; BODY SIZE; EXPLORATORY BEHAVIOR; FEMALE; MALE; NESTING BEHAVIOR; PERCHES; SEX CHARACTERISTICS; SEXUAL BEHAVIOR, ANIMAL; SPECIES SPECIFICITY;

ANHINGIDAE; CATONOTUS; ETHEOSTOMA; PERCIDAE;

EID: 77956174540     PISSN: 03766357     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2010.07.005     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Bandoli J.H. Brood defense and filial cannibalism in the spottail darter, (Etheostoma squamiceps): the effects of parental status and prior experience. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 2002, 51:222-226.
2. Bizazza A., Vaccari G., Pilastro A. Female mate choice in a mating system dominated by male coercion. Behav. Ecol. 2000, 12:59-64.
3. Brooks R., Endler J.A. Female guppies agree to differ: phenotypic and genetic variation in mate-choice behavior and the consequences for sexual selection. Evolution 2001, 55:1644-1655.
4. Clutton-Brock T.H. Sexual selection in males and females. Science 2007, 318:1882-1885.
5. Constanz G.D. Allopaternal care in the tessellated darter, Etheostoma olmstedi (Pisces: Percidae). Environ. Biol. Fish. 1985, 14(2-3):175-183.
6. Coyne J.A., Crittenden A.P., Mah K. Genetics of a pheromonal difference contributing to reproductive isolation in Drosophila. Science 1994, 265:1461-1464.
7. Dobzhansky T. Genetics and the Origin of Species 1937, Columbia University Press, New York.
8. Etnier D.A., Starnes W.C. The Fishes of Tennessee 1993, University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, TN.
9. Fuller R.C. Disentangling female mate choice and male competition in the rainbow darter, Etheostoma caeruleum. Copeia 2003, 2003(1):138-148.
10. Gowaty P.A., Hubbell S.P. Chance, time allocation and the evolution of adaptively flexible sex role behavior. Int. Comp. Biol. 2005, 45(5):931-944.
11. Hubbs C. Geographic variations in survival of hybrids between etheostomatine fishes. Bull. Tex. Mem. Mus. 1967, 13:1-72.
12. Jamieson I. Do female fish prefer to spawn in nests with eggs for reasons of mate choice copying or egg survival?. Am. Nat. 1995, 145(5):824-832.
13. Jiggins C.D., Naisbit R.E., Coe R.L., Mallet J. Reproductive isolation caused by colour pattern mimicry. Nature 2001, 411:302-305.
14. Johnstone R.A., Reynolds J.D., Deutsch J.C. Mutual mate choice and sex differences in choosiness. Evolution 1996, 50(4):1382-1391.
15. Jones Powers G.L., Mayden R.L. Threatened Fishes of the World: Etheostoma percurum Jenkins 1993 (Percidae). Environ. Biol. Fish. 2003, 67(4):358.
16. Jordan R., Kellogg K., Juanes F., Stauffer J. Evaluation of female mate choice cues in a group of Lake Malawi mbuna (Cichlidae). Copeia 2003, 2003:181-186.
17. Knapp R.A., Sargent C.S. Egg-mimicry as a mating strategy in the fantail darter, Etheostoma flabellare: females prefer males with eggs. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 1989, 25(5):321-326.
18. Knouft J.H., Page L.M. Nest defense against predators by the male fringed darter (Etheostoma crossopterum). Copeia 2004, 2004(4):915-918.
19. Knouft J.H., Page L.M., Plewa M.J. Antimicrobial egg cleaning by the fringed darter (Perciformes: Percidae: Etheostoma crossopterum): implications of a novel component of parental care in fishes. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 2003, 270(1531):2405-2411.
20. Kozak G.M., Reisland M., Boughmann J.W. Sex differences in mate recognition and conspecific preference in species with mutual mate choice. Evolution 2009, 63(2):353-365.
21. Kronforst M.R., Young L.G., Kapan D.D., McNeely C., O'Neill R.J., Gilbert L.E. Linkage of butterfly mate preference and wing color preference cue at the genomic location of wingless. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 2006, 103:6575-6580.
22. Kuehne R.A., Barbour R.W. The American Darters 1983, University Press of Kentucky, Lexington.
23. Lande R. Models of speciation by sexual selection on polygenic traits. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1981, 78:3721-3725.
24. Lindquist D.G., Shute J.R., Shute P.W. Spawning and nesting behavior of the Waccamaw darter, Etheostoma perlongum. Environ. Biol. Fish. 1981, 6:177-191.
25. Lindström K., Sargent R.C. Food access, brood size and filial cannibalism in the fantail darter, Etheostoma flabellare. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 1997, 40:107-110.
26. Maan M.E., Seehausen O., Sorderberg L., Johnson L., Ripmeester E.A.P., Mrosso H.D.J., Taylor M.I., van Dooren T.J.M., van Alphen J.M. Intraspecific sexual selection on a speciation trait, male coloration, in the Lake Victorian cichlid Pundamilia nyererei. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 2004, 271:2445-2452.
27. Mendelson T.C. Sexual isolation evolves faster than hybrid inviability in a diverse and sexually dimorphic genus of fish (Percidae: Etheostoma). Evolution 2003, 57(2):317-327.
28. Mendelson T.C., Simons J.N. AFLPs resolve cytonuclear discordance and increase resolution among barcheek darters (Percidae: Etheostoma: Catonotus). Mol. Phyl. Evol. 2006, 41:445-453.
29. Moretz J.A., Rogers W. An ethological analysis of the breeding behavior of the Fantail Darter, Etheostoma flabellare. Am. Midl. Nat. 2004, 152(1):140-144.
30. Nuechterlein G.L. Courtship behavior and reproductive isolation of dark- and light-phase western grebes. Auk 1981, 98:335-349.
31. Page L.M. Handbook of Darters 1983, TFH Publications, Saddle Brook, New Jersey.
32. Page L.M. Evolution of reproductive behaviors in percid fishes Ill. Natl. Hist. Surv. Bull. 1985, 33(3):275-295.
33. Page L.M., Burr B.M. The life history of the slabrock darter, Etheostoma smithi, in Ferguson Creek, Kentucky. Ill. Natl. Hist. Surv. Biol. Notes 1976, 99(1-12).
34. Page L.M., Hardman M., Near T.J. Phylogenetic relationships of barcheek darters (Percidae: Etheostoma, Subgenus Catonotus) with descriptions of two new species. Copeia 2003, 512-530.
35. Ritchie M.G. Sexual selection and speciation. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Sys. 2007, 38(1):79-102.
36. Ryan M.J., Rand A.S. Species recognition and sexual selection as a unitary problem in animal communication. Evolution 1993, 47(2):647-657.
37. Saetre G.-P., Moum T., Bureš S., Král M., Adamjan M., Moreno J. A sexually selected character displacement in flycatchers reinforces premating isolation. Nature 1997, 387:589-592.
38. Seehausen O., van Alphen J.J.M. The effect of male coloration on female mate choice in closely related Lake Victoria cichlids (Haplochromis nyererei complex). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 1998, 42:1-8.
39. Servedio M.R. Male versus female mate choice: sexual selection and the evolution of species recognition via reinforcement. Evolution 2007, 61:2772-2789.
40. Stalker H.D. Sexual isolation in the species complex Drosophila virilis. Genetics 1942, 27:238-257.
41. Svensson E.I., Karlsson K., Friberg M., Eroukhmanoff F. Gender differences in species recognition and the evolution of asymmetric sexual isolation. Curr. Biol. 2007, 17s:1943-1947.
42. West Eberhard M.J. Sexual selection, social competition and speciation. Quart. Rev. Biol. 1983, 58:155-183.
43. Winn H.E. Comparative reproductive behavior and ecology of fourteen species of darters (Pisces: Percidae). Ecol. Monogr. 1958, 28(2):155-191.
44. Winn H.E. Observations on reproductive habits of darters (Pisces-Percidae). Am. Midl. Nat. 1958, 59(1):190-212.