Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Magnhagen, C.
Right arrow Articles by Vestergaard, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Magnhagen, C.
Right arrow Articles by Vestergaard, K.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 1991 International Society for Behavioral Ecology

research-article

Risk taking in relation to reproductive investments and future reproductive opportunities: field experiments on nest-guarding common gobies, Pomatoschistus microps

Carin Magnhagen and Klaus Vestergaard

Uppsala University, Department of Zoology, Box 561, S-751 22 Uppsala, Sweden Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Department of Animal Science and Animal Health, DK-1870, Frederiksberg C, Denmark

ABSTRACT

The common goby, Pomatoschistus microps, has parental care, with males building nests and guarding the fertilized eggs until hatching. We carried out field experiments to estimate the response of males to predation risk in relation to developmental stage of their brood and time of the season. Artificial nest substrates were placed in a shallow bay with soft substrate. After the nest had been built and eggs laid in it, a glass jar containing a potential predator (an eelpout, Zoarces viviparus) was placed 15 cm from the goby's nest. We subsequently chased the male goby away from the nest and measured his flight distance and time until return. This was repeated once a day in May, June, and August. Time away from the nest decreased in the course of one brood cycle, with a steeper slope in May compared to the other months, as a result of longer times away from the nest in the beginning of the experiment. Flight distance decreased slightly over one brood cycle and was longer in June than in May and August. In another experiment, a male P. microps was presented to the nest-guarding male, simulating a potential competitor for the nest. Again, we found a decrease in return time with advancement of the brood cycle, but the fish returned faster than when facing a predator, especially in the beginning of the brood cycle. No effect of habituation to the treatment was found, but there seemed to be a slight influence of development stage of the eggs. Thus, risk taking by nest-guarding male P. microps appears to be influenced by time already spent guarding one particular brood and the prospect for future reproductive opportunities. [Behav Ecol 1991 ;2:351–359]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Behav EcolHome page
A. M. Billing, G. Rosenqvist, and A. Berglund
No terminal investment in pipefish males: only young males exhibit risk-prone courtship behavior
Behav. Ecol., May 1, 2007; 18(3): 535 - 540.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Behav EcolHome page
S. Ostlund-Nilsson
Does paternity or paternal investment determine the level of paternal care and does female choice explain egg stealing in the fifteen-spined stickleback?
Behav. Ecol., March 1, 2002; 13(2): 188 - 192.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.