Coral Reefs

, Volume 37, Issue 1, pp 99–103 | Cite as

Strong homing does not predict high site fidelity in juvenile reef fishes

  • Robert P. StreitEmail author
  • David R. Bellwood


After being displaced, juvenile reef fishes are able to return home over large distances. This strong homing behaviour is extraordinary and may allow insights into the longer-term spatial ecology of fish communities. For example, it appears intuitive that strong homing behaviour should be indicative of long-term site fidelity. However, this connection has rarely been tested. We quantified the site fidelity of juvenile fishes of four species after returning home following displacement. Two species, parrotfishes and Pomacentrus moluccensis, showed significantly reduced site fidelity after returning home. On average, they disappeared from their home sites almost 3 d earlier than expected. Mortality or competitive exclusion does not seem to be the main reasons for their disappearance. Rather, we suggest an increased propensity to relocate after encountering alternative reef locations while homing. It appears that some juvenile fishes may have a higher innate spatial flexibility than their strict homing drive suggests.


Homing behaviour Site fidelity Site attachment Spatial resilience Space use 



We thank J Khan, S Tebbett, P O’Brien and the staff at Lizard Island Research Station for field support. Comments by two anonymous reviewers substantially improved this manuscript. This work was supported by the Australian Research Council (DRB) and the Australian Government, Endeavour Postgraduate Scholarship (RPS).


  1. Allen CR, Angeler DG, Cumming GS, Folke C, Twidwell D, Uden DR, Bennett J (2016) Quantifying spatial resilience. J Appl Ecol 53:625–635CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Almany GR, Webster MS (2006) The predation gauntlet: early post-settlement mortality in reef fishes. Coral Reefs 25:19–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bellwood DR, Goatley CHR, Khan JA, Tebbett SB (2016) Site fidelity and homing behaviour in juvenile rabbitfishes (Siganidae). Coral Reefs 35:1151–1155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Booth DJ (2016) Ability to home in small site-attached coral reef fishes. J Fish Biol 89:1501–1506CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Booth DJ, Wellington G (1998) Settlement preferences in coral-reef fishes: effects on patterns of adult and juvenile distributions, individual fitness and population structure. Aust J Ecol 23:274–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Depczynski M, Bellwood DR (2006) Extremes, plasticity, and invariance in vertebrate life history traits: insights from coral reef fishes. Ecology 87:265–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gardiner N, Jones G (2016) Habitat specialisation, site fidelity and sociality predict homing success in coral reef cardinalfish. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 558:81–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Goatley CHR, Bellwood DR (2016) Body size and mortality rates in coral reef fishes: a three-phase relationship. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 283:20161858CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hartney KB (1996) Site fidelity and homing behaviour of some kelp-bed fishes. J Fish Biol 49:1062–1069CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hert E (1992) Homing and home-site fidelity in rock-dwelling cichlids (Pisces: Teleostei) of Lake Malawi, Africa. Environ Biol Fishes 33:229–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hughes TP, Barnes ML, Bellwood DR, Cinner JE, Cumming GS, Jackson JBC, Kleypas J, van de Leemput IA, Lough JM, Morrison TH, Palumbi SR, van Nes EH, Scheffer M (2017) Coral reefs in the Anthropocene. Nature 546:82–90CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Kaunda-Arara B, Rose GA (2004) Homing and site fidelity in the greasy grouper Epinephelus tauvina (Serranidae) within a marine protected area in coastal Kenya. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 277:245–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Khan JA, Goatley CHR, Brandl SJ, Tebbett SB, Bellwood DR (2017) Shelter use by large reef fishes: long-term occupancy and the impacts of disturbance. Coral Reefs. Google Scholar
  14. Levin PS (1998) The significance of variable and density-independent post-recruitment mortality in local populations of reef fishes. Aust J Ecol 23:246–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lewis RA (1997) Recruitment and post-recruit immigration affect the local population size of coral reef fishes. Coral Reefs 16:139–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Marnane M (2000) Site fidelity and homing behaviour in coral reef cardinalfishes. J Fish Biol 57:1590–1600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Rueger T, Gardiner NM, Jones GP (2016) Homing is not for everyone: displaced cardinalfish find a new place to live. J Fish Biol 89:2182–2188CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Sale PF, Ferrell DJ (1988) Early survivorship of juvenile coral reef fishes. Coral Reefs 7:117–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Streit RP, Bellwood DR (2017) High prevalence of homing behaviour among juvenile coral-reef fishes and the role of body size. Coral Reefs. Google Scholar
  20. Thompson S (1983) Homing in a territorial reef fish. Copeia 1983:832–834CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Welsh JQ, Goatley CHR, Bellwood DR (2013) The ontogeny of home ranges: evidence from coral reef fishes. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 280:20132066CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of Science and Engineering, Marine Biology and EcologyJames Cook UniversityTownsvilleAustralia
  2. 2.Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef StudiesJames Cook UniversityTownsvilleAustralia

Personalised recommendations