Environmental Biology of Fishes

, Volume 39, Issue 3, pp 219–229

Observations of the mating behavior and dentition of the round stingray,Urolophus halleri

  • Shawn E. Nordell
Full paper

Synopsis

The mating behavior and dentition ofUrolophus halleri, the round stingray was examined. Males frequently bite females during the mating period but most male biting does not result in copulation. In bites that do not lead to copulation, males bite the posterior (or occasionally the medial) portion of the females' disc but females often free themselves from these bites. In bites that precede copulation, males bite the anterior portion of the females' disc and females do not struggle to free themselves. Thus, females may exert some form of choice when they are bitten. Mature males have sexually dimorphic dentition that may aid in holding females. A principal component analysis (PCA) showed that in juvenile males, the relative size of the teeth decrease while the relative thickness of the disc increases as body size enlarges; adult males displayed no clear pattern. In adult females, there is a relative decrease in tooth size and increase in relative disc thickness as body size enlarges. The relative increase in females disc thickness in areas where they are bitten may function to minimize the amount of damage due to non-copulatory biting. There is no indication that biting functions to induce female receptivity but it may allow females and males to acquire information about potential mates. Thus, copulatory biting functions to maintain contact during copulation while the function of non-copulatory biting is less clear.

Key words

Sexual dimorphism Biting Elasmobranch Dasyatidae Multivariate analysis 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References cited

  1. Babel, J.S., 1967. Reproduction, life history, and ecology of the round stingray,Urolophus halleri Cooper. State of Calif Dept. Fish and Game Bulletin 137: 1–104.Google Scholar
  2. Baxter, R.M. & J. Meester. 1982. The captive behavior of the red musk shrew,Crocidura flavescens flavescens (Sorcidae:Crocidurinae). Mammalia 46: 11–28.Google Scholar
  3. Bigelow, H.B. & W.C. Schroeder. 1953. Fishes of the western North Atlantic: sawfishes, guitarfishes, skates, and rays. Sears Mem. Found. Marine Res. No. l Part 2. 588 pp.Google Scholar
  4. Bookstein, F.L., B. Chernoff, R.L. Elder, J.M. Humphries, G.R. Smith & R.E. Strauss. 1985. Morphometrics in evolutionary biology. Spec. Publ.15, Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 277 pp.Google Scholar
  5. Budker, P. 1971. The life of sharks. Weidenfeld and Nicolson, London. 222 pp.Google Scholar
  6. Carpenter, C.C. & G.W. Ferguson. 1977. Variation and evolution of stereotyped behavior in reptiles. pp. 335–554. In: C. Gans & D.A. Tinkle (ed.) Biology of the Reptilia, Vol. 7, Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
  7. Castro, J.I., P.M. Bubucis & N.A. Overstrom. 1988. The reproductive biology of the chain dogfish, Scyliorhinus retifer. Copeia 1988: 740–746.Google Scholar
  8. Churchfield, S. 1990. The natural history of shrews. Comstock Publ. Assoc., Ithaca. 178 pp.Google Scholar
  9. Clark, E. 1963. The maintenance of sharks in captivity, with a report on their instrumental conditioning. pp. 145–146. In: P.W. Gilbert (ed.) Sharks and Survival, D.C. Health and Co., Boston.Google Scholar
  10. Clark, E. 1975. The strangest sea. Natl. Geo. Mag. 148: 338–343.Google Scholar
  11. Cox, C.R. & B.J. Le Boeuf. 1977. Female incitation of male competition: a mechanism of sexual selection. Amer. Nat. 111: 317–335.Google Scholar
  12. Dempster, R.P. & E.S. Herald. 1961. Notes on the horn sharkHeterodontus francisis with observations on mating activities. Occ. Papers Cal. Acad. Sci. 33: 1–7.Google Scholar
  13. Feduccia, A. & B.H. Slaughter. 1974. Sexual dimorphism in skates (Rajidae) and its possible role in differential niche utilization. Evolution 28: 164–168.Google Scholar
  14. Gudger, E.W. 1912. Summary of work done on the fishes of Tortugas Carnegie Inst. Wash. Year Book 11: 148–150.Google Scholar
  15. Houck, L.D. 1980. Courtship behavior in the plethodontid salamander,Desmognathus wrighti. Amer. Zool. 20: 825.Google Scholar
  16. Houck, L.D. & N.L. Reagan. 1990. Male courtship pheromones increase female receptivity in a plethodontid salamander. Anim. Behav. 39: 729–734.Google Scholar
  17. Hunte, W., R.A. Myers & R.W. Doyle. 1985. Bayesian mating decisions in an amphipod,Gammarus lawrencianus Bousfield. Anim. Behav. 33: 366–372.Google Scholar
  18. Kleiman, D.G. & J.F. Eisenberg. 1973. Comparisons of canid and felid systems from an evolutionary perspective. Anim. Behav. 21: 637–659.Google Scholar
  19. Klimley, P.A. 1980. Observations of courtship and copulation in the nurse shark, Ginglymostoma cirratum. Copeia 1980: 878–882.Google Scholar
  20. Libby, E.L. & P.W. Gilbert. 1960. Reproduction in the clear nosed skate,Raja eglantaria. Anat. Rec. 138: 365.Google Scholar
  21. Luer, C.A. & P.W. Gilbert. 1985. Mating behavior, egg deposition, incubation period, and hatching in the clearnose skate,Raja eglantaria. Env. Biol. Fish. 13: 161–171.Google Scholar
  22. McCourt, R.M. & A.N. Kerstitch. 1980. Mating behavior and sexual dimorphism in dentition in the stingray Urolophus concentricus from the Gulf of California. Copeia 1980: 900–901.Google Scholar
  23. McEachran, J.D. 1977. Reply to ‘Sexual dimorphism in skates (Rajidae)’. Evolution 31: 218–220.Google Scholar
  24. McEachran, J.D., D.F. Boesch & J.A. Musick. 1976. Food division within two sympatric species-pairs of skates (Pisces:Rajidae). Marine Biology 35: 301–317.Google Scholar
  25. Nordell, S.E. 1990. The courtship and mating behavior of the round stingray, Urolophus halleri (Cooper). Master's Thesis, University of Arizona, Tucson. 47 pp.Google Scholar
  26. Pearson, O.P. 1944. Reproduction in the shrewBlarina brevicauda. Amer. J. Anat. 75: 39.Google Scholar
  27. Pratt, H.L. Jr. 1979. Reproduction in the blue shark,Prionace glauca. U.S. Fish. Bull. 77: 309–376.Google Scholar
  28. Price, K.S. Jr. 1967. Copulatory behavior in the clearnose skate, Raja eglanteria, in lower Chesapeake Bay. Copeia 1967: 854–855.Google Scholar
  29. Promislow, D.E.L. 1987. Courtship behavior of a plethodontid salamander,Desmognathus aeneus. J. Herp. 4: 298–306.Google Scholar
  30. Reed, J.C. & R.G. Gilmore. 1981. Inshore occurrence and nuptial behavior of the roughtail stingray,Dasyatis centroura (Dasyatidae), on the continental shelf, east central Florida. Northeast Gulf Science 5: 59–62.Google Scholar
  31. Riedman, M.L. & J.A. Estes. 1990. The sea otter (Enhyudra lutris): behavior, ecology, and natural history. Biological Report (Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Dept. of Interior, Washington) 90 (14): 2–90.Google Scholar
  32. Schmidtlein, R. 1978. Beobachtungen über die Lebensweise einiger Seethiere innerhalb der Aquarien der zoologischen Station. Mitt. Zool. St. Neapel 7: 1–27.Google Scholar
  33. Sokal, R.R. & F.J. Rohlf. 1981. Biometry, 2nd edition. Freeman, San Francisco. 859 pp.Google Scholar
  34. Springer, S. 1960. Natural history of the sandbar shark,Eulamia milberti. U.S. Fish. Bull. 61: 1–38.Google Scholar
  35. Springer, S. 1967. Social organization of shark population. pp. 149–174. In: P.W. Gilbert, R.F. Matheson & D.P. Rall (ed.) Sharks, Skates, and Rays, Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore.Google Scholar
  36. Stevens, J.D. 1974. The occurrence and significance of tooth cuts on the blue shark (Prionace glauca L.) from British waters. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. U.K. 54: 373–378.Google Scholar
  37. Strauss, R.E. 1990. Predation and life-history variation inPoecilia reticulata (Cyprinodontiformes: Poeciliidae). Env. Biol. Fish. 27: 121–130.Google Scholar
  38. Suda, A. 1953. Ecological study on the blue shark (Prionace glauca Linne). South Sea Area Fish. Res. Lab. Rep. 26: 1–11.Google Scholar
  39. Taylor, L.R. Jr. 1971. Shark sex. Fish Life 2: 17–24.Google Scholar
  40. Thomson, D.A., L.T. Findley & A.N. Kerstitch. 1987. Reef fishes of the Sea of Cortez. The Univ. of Arizona Press, Tucson. 302 pp.Google Scholar
  41. Tricas, T.C. 1980. Courtship and mating-related behaviors in myliobatid rays. Copeia 1980: 553–556.Google Scholar
  42. Tricas, T.C. & E.M. Le Feuvre. 1985. Mating in the reef white-tip sharkTriaenodon obesus. Mar. Biol. 84: 233–237.Google Scholar
  43. Wourms, J.P. 1977. Reproduction and development in chondrichthyan fishes. Amer. Zool. 17: 379–410.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shawn E. Nordell
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Ecology and Evolutionary BiologyUniversity of ArizonaTucsonU.S.A.
  2. 2.Department of BiologyUniversity of New MexicoAlbuquerqueU.S.A.

Personalised recommendations