Evolutionary Ecology

, Volume 27, Issue 4, pp 739–753 | Cite as

Sexual dimorphism and intra-populational colour pattern variation in the aposematic frog Dendrobates tinctorius

Original Paper

Abstract

Despite the predicted purifying role of stabilising selection against variation in warning signals, many aposematic species exhibit high variation in their colour patterns. The maintenance of such variation is not well understood, but it has been suggested to be the result of an interaction between sexual and natural selection. This interaction could also facilitate the evolution of sexual dichromatism. Here we analyse in detail the colour patterns of the poison frog Dendrobates tinctorius and evaluate the possible correlates of the variability in aposematic signals in a natural population. Against the theoretical predictions of aposematism, we found that there is enormous intra-populational variation in colour patterns and that these also differ between the sexes: males have a yellower dorsum and bluer limbs than females. We discuss the possible roles of natural and sexual selection in the maintenance of this sexual dimorphism in coloration and argue that parental care could work synergistically with aposematism to select for yellower males.

Keywords

Aposematism Polymorphism Sexual dimorphism Parental care Poison frog 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This study was funded by two Les Nouragues grants from the CNRS (France), and student research allowances from the School of Psychology at the University of Exeter (UK) and the CIE at Deakin University (Australia), all to BR. P. Gaucher and M. Fernandez provided logistic support. We are thankful to Diana Pizano and J. Devillechabrolle for assistance in the field, and to J. Mappes, J. Valkonen, J. Brown and two anonymous reviewers for thoughtful comments and suggestions that improved the manuscript. This work was done in compliance with the local environmental regulations (research permit issued by CNRS-Guyane) and following ASAB’s guidelines for the treatment of animals in research.

References

  1. Born M, Bongers F, Poelman EH, Sterck FJ (2010) Dry-season retreat and dietary shift of the dart-poison frog Dendrobates tinctorius (Anura: Dendrobatidae). Phyllomedusa 9:37–52Google Scholar
  2. Boukal DS, Berec L, Krivan V (2008) Does sex-selective predation stabilize or destabilize predator-prey dynamics? PLoS One 3:e2687. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0002687
  3. Brakefield PM (1985) Polymorphic Mullerian mimicry and interactions with thermal melanism in ladybirds and a soldier beetle. A hypothesis. Biol J Linn Soc 26:243–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brodie ED (1992) Correlational selection for color pattern and antipredator behavior in the garter snake Thamnophis ordinoides. Evolution 46:1284–1298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brodie ED (1993) Differential avoidance of coral snake banded patterns by free-ranging avian predators in Costa Rica. Evolution 47:227–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chouteau M, Angers B (2011) The role of predators in maintaining the geographic organization of aposematic signals. Am Nat 178:810–817PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Christe P, Keller L, Roulin A (2006) The predation cost of being a male: implications for sex-specific rates of ageing. Oikos 114:381–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Codella SG, Lederhouse RC (1989) Intersexual comparison of mimetic protection in the black swallowtail butterfly, Papilio polyxenes. Experiments with captive blue jay predators. Evolution 43:410–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Comeault AA, Noonan BP (2011) Spatial variation in the fitness of divergent aposematic phenotypes of the poison frog, Dendrobates tinctorius. J Evol Biol 24:1374–1379PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Crothers L, Gering E, Cummings M (2011) Aposematic signal variation predicts male–male interactions in a polymorphic poison frog. Evolution 65:599–605PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Darst CR, Cummings ME, Cannatella DC (2006) A mechanism for diversity in warning signals: conspicuousness versus toxicity in poison frogs. Proc Natl Acad Sci 103:5852–5857PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Devillechabrolle J (2011) Mise en place et analyse d’un protocole pour le suivi à long terme d’amphibiens en forêt tropicale humide de Guyane Française. Masters Thesis, University of Marseille, Marseille, FranceGoogle Scholar
  13. Endler JA (1986) Natural selection in the wild. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  14. Endler JA (1988) Frequency-dependent predation, crypsis and aposematic coloration. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B 319:505–523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Endler JA (1991) Interactions between predators and prey. In: Krebs JR, Davies NB (eds) Behavioural ecology. An evolutionary approach. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 169–196Google Scholar
  16. Endler JA (1993) The color of light in forests and its implications. Ecol Monogr 63:1–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Endler JA (2000) Evolutionary implications of the interaction between animal signals and the environment. In: Espmark YO, Amundsen T, Rosenqvist G (eds) Animal signals: signalling and signal design in animal communication. Tapir Academic Press, Trondheim, pp 11–46Google Scholar
  18. Endler JA (2012) a framework for analysing colour pattern geometry: adjacent colours. Biol J Linn Soc 107:233–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Endler JA, Mappes J (2004) Predator mixes and the conspicuousness of aposematic signals. Am Nat 163:532–547PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Exnerová A, Svádová K, Stys P, Barcalová S, Landová E, Prokopovvá M, Fuchs R, Socha R (2006) Importance of colour in the reaction of passerine predators to aposematic prey: experiments with mutants of Pyrrhocoris apterus (Heteroptera). Biol J Linn Soc 88:143–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Forsman A, Appelqvist S (1999) Experimental manipulation reveals differential effects of colour pattern on survival in male and female pygmy grasshoppers. J Evol Biol 12:391–401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gray SM, McKinnon JS (2007) Linking color polymorphism maintenance and speciation. Trends Ecol Evol 22:71–79PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Greenwood JJD, Wood EM, Batchelor S (1981) Apostatic selection of distasteful prey. Heredity 47:27–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hegna RH, Saporito RA, Gerow KG, Donnelly MA (2011) Contrasting colors of an aposematic poison frog do not affect predation. Ann Zool Fenn 48:29–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Joron M, Mallet J (1998) Diversity in mimicry: paradox or paradigm? Trends Ecol Evol 13:461–463PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kunte K (2008) Mimetic butterflies support Wallace’s model of sexual dimorphism. Proc R Soc B 275:1617–1624PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lederhouse RC, Scriber JM (1987) Increased relative frequency of dark morph females in the tiger swallowtail Papilio glaucus (Lepidoptera, Papilionidae) in South-Central Florida. Am Midl Nat 118:211–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lescure J, Marty C (2000) Atlas des Amphibiens de Guyane, vol 45. Muséum National D’Histoire Naturelle, ParisGoogle Scholar
  29. Lindell LE, Forsman A (1996) Sexual dichromatism in snakes: support for the flicker-fusion hypothesis. Can J Zool 74:2254–2256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lötters S, Jungfer K-H, Henkel FW, Schmidt W (2007) Poison frogs: biology, species and captive husbandry. Edition Chimaira, FrankurtGoogle Scholar
  31. Maan ME, Cummings ME (2008) Female preferences for aposematic signal components in a polymorphic poison frog. Evolution 62:2334–2345PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Maan ME, Cummings ME (2009) Sexual dimorphism and directional sexual selection on aposematic signals in a poison frog. Proc Natl Acad Sci 106:19072–19077PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mallet J, Joron M (1999) Evolution of diversity in warning color and mimicry: polymorphisms, shifting balance, and speciation. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 30:201–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Myers CW, Daly JW (1983) Dart-poison frogs. Sci Am 248:96–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Nokelainen O, Hegna RH, Reudler JH, Lindstedt C, Mappes J (2012) Trade-off between warning signal efficacy and mating success in the wood tiger moth. Proc R Soc B 279:257–265PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Noonan BP, Comeault AA (2009) The role of predator selection on polymorphic aposematic poison frogs. Biol Lett 5:51–54PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Noonan BP, Gaucher P (2006) Refugial isolation and secondary contact in the dyeing poison frog Dendrobates tinctorius. Mol Ecol 15:4425–4435PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. O’Donald P, Majerus MEN (1984) Polymorphism of melanic ladybirds maintained by frequency-dependent sexual selection. Biol J Linn Soc 23:101–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Poulton EB (1890) The colours of animals: their meaning and use, vol 26. Kegan Paul, TrenchGoogle Scholar
  40. Pröhl H, Ostrowski T (2011) Behavioural elements reflect phenotypic colour divergence in a poison frog. Evol Ecol 25:993–1015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Prudic KL, Oliver JC, Sperling FAH (2007) The signal environment is more important than diet or chemical specialization in the evolution of warning coloration. Proc Natl Acad Sci 104:19381–19386PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Rice WR (1989) Analyzing tables of statistical tests. Evolution 43:223–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Rudh A, Rogell B, Hastad O, Qvarnstrom A (2011) Rapid population divergence linked with co-variation between coloration and sexual display in strawberry poison frogs. Evolution 65:1271–1282PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Ruxton GD, Sherratt TN, Speed MP (2004) Avoiding attack: the evolutionary ecology of crypsis, warning signals and mimicry. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Saporito RA, Zuercher R, Roberts M, Gerow KG, Donnelly MA (2007) Experimental evidence for aposematism in the dendrobatid poison frog Oophaga pumilio. Copeia 2007:1006–1011Google Scholar
  46. Shine R, Madsen T (1994) Sexual dichromatism in snakes of the genus Vipera. A reviews and a new evolutionary hypothesis. J Herpetol 28:114–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Siddiqi A, Cronin TW, Loew ER, Vorobyev M, Summers K (2004) Interspecific and intraspecific views of color signals in the strawberry poison frog Dendrobates pumilio. J Exp Biol 207:2471–2485PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Silverstone PA (1975) A revision of the poison-arrow frogs of the genus Dendrobates Wagler. Nat Hist Mus Los Angeles Co. Sci Bull 21:1–55Google Scholar
  49. Sinervo B, Svensson E (2002) Correlational selection and the evolution of genomic architecture. Heredity 89:329–338PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Stokes AN, Cook DG, Hanifin CT, Brodie ED (2011) Sex-biased predation on newts of the genus Taricha by a novel predator and its relationship with tetrodotoxin toxicity. Am Midl Nat 165:389–399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Summers K, Clough ME (2001) The evolution of coloration and toxicity in the poison frog family (Dendrobatidae). Proc Natl Acad Sci 98:6227–6232PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Ueno H, Sato Y, Tsuchida K (1998) Colour-associated mating success in a polymorphic Ladybird Beetle, Harmonia axyridis. Funct Ecol 12:757–761CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Valkonen J, Niskanen M, Bjorklund M, Mappes J (2011) Disruption or aposematism? Significance of dorsal zigzag pattern of European vipers. Evol Ecol 25:1047–1063CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Williams P (2007) The distribution of bumblebee colour patterns worldwide: possible significance for thermoregulation, crypsis, and warning mimicry. Biol J Linn Soc 92:97–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Wollenberg KC, Lotters S, Mora-Ferrer C, Veith M (2008) Disentangling composite colour patterns in a poison frog species. Biol J Linn Soc 93:433–444CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Integrative Ecology, School of Life and Environmental SciencesDeakin University at Waurn PondsGeelongAustralia
  2. 2.Centre of Excellence in Biological Interactions, Department of Biological and Environmental ScienceUniversity of JyväskyläJyväskyläFinland

Personalised recommendations