Refine
Year of publication
- 2009 (4) (remove)
Language
- English (4)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (4)
Keywords
Institute
Males often face strong mating competition by neighboring males in their social environment. A recent study by Plath et al. (Anim Behav 75:21-29, 2008a) has demonstrated that the visual presence of a male competitor (i.e., an audience male) affects the expression of male mating preferences in a poeciliid fish (Poecilia mexicana) with a weaker expression of mating preferences when an audience male observed the focal male. This may be a tactic to reduce sperm competition, since surrounding males likely share intrinsic preferences for female traits or copy mate choice decisions. Here, we examined the hypothesis that a same-sex audience would affect female mate preferences less than male mating preferences. Our hypothesis was based on the assumptions that (1) competition for mates in a fashion that would be comparable in strength to sperm competition or overt male-male aggression is absent among Poecilia females, and (2) P. mexicana females typically form female-biased shoals, such that almost any female mate choice in nature occurs in front of a female audience. Poecilia females (P. mexicana, surface and cave form, and the closely related gynogenetic Poecilia formosa) were given a choice between a large and a small male, and the tests were repeated while a conspecific, a heterospecific, or no audience female (control) was presented. Females spent more time in the neutral zone and, thus, less time near the males during the second part of a trial when an audience was presented, but-consistent with predictions-females showed only slightly weaker expression of mate preferences during the second part of the tests. This decline was not specific to the treatment involving an audience and was significantly weaker than the effect seen in the male sex.
Mate choice is mediated by a range of sensory cues, and assortative mating based on these cues can drive reproductive isolation among diverging populations. A specific feature of mormyrid fish, the electric organ discharge (EOD), is used for electrolocation and intraspecific communication. We hypothesized that the EOD also facilitates assortative mating and ultimately promotes prezygotic reproductive isolation in African weakly electric fishes. Our behavioural experiments using live males as well as EOD playback demonstrated that female mate recognition is influenced by EOD signals and that females are attracted to EOD characteristics of conspecific males. The dual function of the EOD for both foraging and social communication (including mate recognition leading to assortative mating) underlines the importance of electric signal differentiation for the divergence of African weakly electric fishes. Thus, the EOD provides an intriguing mechanism promoting trophic divergence and reproductive isolation between two closely related Campylomormyrus species occurring in sympatry in the lower Congo rapids.
Background: Multidirectional interactions in social networks can have a profound effect on mate choice behavior; e.g., Poecilia mexicana males show weaker expression of mating preferences when being observed by a rival. This may be an adaptation to reduce sperm competition risk, which arises because commonly preferred female phenotypes will receive attention also from surrounding males, and/or because other males can copy the focal male's mate choice. Do P. mexicana males indeed respond to perceived sperm competition risk? We gave males a choice between two females and repeated the tests under one of the following conditions: (1) an empty transparent cylinder was presented (control); (2) another ("audience") male inside the cylinder observed the focal male throughout the 2nd part, or (3) the audience male was presented only before the tests, but could not eavesdrop during the actual choice tests (non-specific sperm competition risk treatments); (4) the focal male could see a rival male interact sexually with the previously preferred, or (5) with the non-preferred female before the 2nd part of the tests (specific sperm competition risk treatments). Results: The strength of individual male preferences declined slightly also during the control treatment (1). However, this decrease was more than two-fold stronger in audience treatment (2), i.e., with non-specific sperm competition risk including the possibility for visual eavesdropping by the audience male. No audience effect was found in treatments (3) and (5), but a weak effect was also observed when the focal male had seen the previously preferred female sexually interact with a rival male (treatment 4; specific sperm competition risk). Conclusion: When comparing the two 'non-specific sperm competition risk' treatments, a very strong effect was found only when the audience male could actually observe the focal male during mate choice [treatment (2)]. This suggests that focal males indeed attempt to conceal their mating preferences so as to prevent surrounding males from copying their mate choice. When there is no potential for eavesdropping [treatment (3)], non-specific specific sperm competition risk seems to play a minor or no role. Our results also show that P. mexicana males tend to share their mating effort more equally among females when the resource value of their previously preferred mate decreases after mating with a rival male (perceived specific sperm competition risk), but this effect is comparatively weak.
Several recent studies reported on so-called audience effects in male Atlantic mollies (Poecilia mexicana), in which the visual presence of a potential rival affects male sexual activity. We asked whether and how audience effects interact with male sexual harassment. Poecilia mexicana almost constantly attempt to mate, while females are mostly non- responsive to male approaches. Females flee from this sexual harassment and, thus, are more vigilant in the presence of males, so females may have hampered feeding opportunities. Do audience effects lead to altered male sexual harassment? Focal females were given an opportunity to feed in the presence of a male or a female partner and the difference in feeding times was interpreted as an effect caused by male harassment. Tests were conducted without an audience (1), or an audience male was visually presented either directly inside the test tank (2), or further away (in an adjoining compartment (3)). We found that levels of pre-mating behaviour did not vary significantly among treatments, but males exhibited more copulation attempts (thrusting) in treatment (3), suggesting that males respond to increased risk of sperm competition with higher sperm expenditure. Females fed less (and started feeding later) when a harassing partner male was around, and this effect was not dependent on the audience treatment, but, overall, females spent more time feeding (and started feeding earlier) when an audience was presented. Hence, feeding time reductions appear to be independent of audience effects, but perceived 'safety in numbers' may lead to increased foraging in larger groups.