Skip Navigation



Behavioral Ecology Advance Access published online on June 29, 2007

Behavioral Ecology, doi:10.1093/beheco/arm051
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Lay Summary
Right arrow Supplementary Material
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
18/5/822    most recent
arm051v1
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 McGhee, K. E.
Right arrow Articles by Travis, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by McGhee, K. E.
Right arrow Articles by Travis, J.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2007. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Male competition and female choice interact to determine mating success in the bluefin killifish

Katie E. McGheea, Rebecca C. Fullerb and Joseph Travisa

a Department of Biological Science, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32306, USA b Department of Animal Biology, University of Illinois, Champaign, IL 61820, USA

Address correspondence to K.E. McGhee. E-mail: kmcghee{at}bio.fsu.edu.


   Abstract

Whether male competition and female choice act in concert, independently, or in opposition is a critical issue for understanding sexual selection. In complex social systems, the outcomes of pairwise interactions may not be accurate indicators of how sexual selection emerges. We investigated how female choice and male competition interact in the bluefin killifish, Lucania goodei, in a 3-staged experiment where 1) females could choose between 2 males, 2) those males could interact in the presence of that female, and 3) females and males could freely interact and spawn. In the pairwise stages (1 and 2), females displayed pronounced preferences between males and male competition produced a distinctly dominant individual. None of the morphological traits, including color, measured in males were associated with either female preference or male dominance. When all 3 fish interacted (stage 3), male activity level was the sole predictor of spawning success. Males with elevated activity levels were more aggressive toward males and females, exhibited intensified courtship, and obtained more spawns. Female preference did not predict the number of spawns with a male, but it did predict her latency to spawn; females spawned more quickly with preferred males. Thus, male competition and female choice interact to determine reproductive success, but there is evidence for conflict and a cost to females of associating with dominant males. Reproductive success in this species is not easily predicted from simple measures of morphology or female preference and is influenced by complex social interactions, both between males, and between males and females.

Key words: aggressive behavior, dominance status, Lucania goodei, sexual conflict, sexual selection, social interactions.

Received 10 February 2007; revised 19 April 2007; accepted 19 April 2007.


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




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.