Multiple paternity in the cooperatively breeding fish Neolamprologus pulcher
- 286 Downloads
In cooperative breeders, mature males may compete for fertilizations. In this study, we measured the degree of multiple paternity in a natural population of a cooperatively breeding fish. Neolamprologus pulcher (Perciformes: Cichlidae) is a highly social cichlid endemic to Lake Tanganyika. We used highly variable microsatellite loci to survey 12 groups with an average number of 10.6 brood care helpers per group and a total of 43 offspring (mean 3.6 per brood). In 11 of 12 groups, all young were assigned to the dominant female. The dominant male sired all offspring in three groups, part of the offspring in four groups, and in five groups, he had no paternity at all. In total, 44.2% of young were not fathered by the current male territory owner. Multiple paternity was found in 5 of 12 broods (41.7 %), with 8 of 35 young (22.9 %) being sired by males other than the respective territory owners. This is an exceptionally high rate of extra-pair paternity among cooperatively breeding vertebrates. Neither helpers present in these territories during collection nor neighbouring males were unequivocally assigned to have sired these extra-pair young. However, behavioural observations suggest that male helpers may have produced these young before being expelled from the territory in response to this reproductive parasitism. We discuss these results in the light of reproductive skew theory, cooperative breeding in vertebrates and alternative reproductive tactics in fish.
KeywordsParentage Microsatellites Cichlids Lake Tanganyika Alternative mating tactics
We would like to thank Matthias Müller and Gottfried Brem for providing lab facilities. Andrea Kunz assisted in the field. Dolores Schütz, Gudrun Pachler and Sigal Balshine-Earn contributed by numerous discussions. Special thanks to Eva Skubic and Dik Heg for discussion, help and constructive comments on the manuscript. The work was funded by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF: project P10916-BIO) and the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF: project 3100A0-105626). This study complies with the current laws of Zambia, Austria and Switzerland.
- Brooker MG, Rowley I, Adams M, Baversock PR (1990) Promiscuity: an inbreeding avoidance mechanism in a socially monogamous species? Behav Ecol Sociobiol 26:191–199Google Scholar
- Bruce JP, Quinn JS, Sloane SA, White BN (1996) DNA fingerprinting reveals monogamy in the bushtit, a cooperatively breeding species. Auk 113:511–516Google Scholar
- Emlen ST (1982) The evolution of helping. I. An ecological constraints model. Am Nat 119:29–39Google Scholar
- Kohler U (1998) Zur Struktur und Evolution des Sozialsystems von Neolamprologus multifasciatus (Cichlidae, Pisces), dem kleinsten Schneckenbuntbarsch des Tanganjikasees. PhD thesis, Ludwig-Maximilians Universität München, GermanyGoogle Scholar
- Limberger D (1983) Pairs and harems in a cichlid fish, Lamprologus brichardi. Z Tierpsychol 62:115–144Google Scholar
- Raymond M, Rousset F (1995) GENEPOP (version 1.2): population genetics software for exact tests and ecumenicism. J Heredity 86:248–249Google Scholar
- Sambrook J, Fritsch EF, Maniatis T (1989) Molecular cloning: a laboratory manual. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, NYGoogle Scholar
- Taborsky M (1999) Conflict or cooperation: what determines optimal solutions to competition in fish reproduction? In: Oliveira RF, Almada V, Goncalves E (eds) Behaviour and conservation of littoral fishes. ISPA, Lisboa, pp 301–349Google Scholar
- Taborsky M (2008) Alternative reproductive tactics in fish. In: Oliveira RF, Taborsky M, Brockmann HJ (eds) Alternative reproductive tactics: an integrative approach. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 251–299Google Scholar
- Vehrencamp SL (1983b) Optimal degree of skew in cooperative societies. Am Zool 23:327–335Google Scholar