, Volume 61, Issue 1, pp 60–69 | Cite as

Determinants of territory size in the pomacentrid reef fish, Parma victoriae

  • M. D. Norman
  • G. P. Jones
Original Papers


Factors governing the size of territories defended by the pomacentrid reef fish, Parma victoriae, were investigated, prompted by contradictory predictions in the literature concerning the effects of food supply and competitors. Observations were carried out over the non-breeding period (March–October) on a medium density population in which territories were partially contiguous. The territory size of adult fish varied between 3 and 26 m2, and was inversely correlated with local densities of conspecifics. The same range in territory size was found for both males and females, which did not differ in the time they spent on territory defence and foraging activities. No correlation existed between territory size and the abundance of algal food, body size, age or time spent on territory defence. Also, there was little variation in territory size over time, despite seasonal changes in the abundance of food algae.

Experimental reduction of food supplies on isolated territories of males and females had no effect on territory size. In a higher density habitat an experiment was carried out in which population density and food abundance were simultaneously manipulated. This showed that territory size was primarily determined by intraspecific interactions, as territories exhibited considerable increases in size upon removal of neighbours. No changes in the size of defended areas resulted from either artificial increases or decreases of food levels. There were also no changes in the time spent on defence of territories, foraging time or feeding rates associated with food manipulations or territory expansion, which suggested that food was not a limited resource. This conflicted with current theories proposed to explain territory defence and expansion. It is hypothesized that intraspecific interactions constrain territory size well below the optimum in terms of the abundance of preferred food algal species.


Food Supply Defend Algal Species Prefer Food Medium Density 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Armstrong JT (1965) Breeding home range in the nighthawk and other birds; its evolutionary and ecological significance. Ecology 46:619–629Google Scholar
  2. Assem J van den (1967) Territory in the three-spined stickleback Gasterosteus aculeatus L. An experimental study in intraspecific competition. Behav Suppl 16:1–164Google Scholar
  3. Baker MC, Mewaldt LR (1979) The use of space by white-crowned sparrows: Juvenile and adult ranging patterns and home range versus body size comparisons in an avian granivore community. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 6:45–52Google Scholar
  4. Black R (1971) Hatching success in the three-spined stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus) in relation to changes in behavior during the parental phase. Anim Behav 19:532–541Google Scholar
  5. Brown JL (1975) The evolution of behavior. Norton, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. Burger J (1981) Super-territories: A comment. Am Nat 118:578–580Google Scholar
  7. Colgan P (1979) Is a super-territory strategy stable? Am Nat 114:604–605Google Scholar
  8. Davies NB (1978) Ecological questions about territorial behaviour. In: Krebs JR, and Davies NB (eds), Behavioural ecology: an evolutionary approach, Blackwell, Oxford, pp 317–350Google Scholar
  9. Dhondt AA, Hublé J (1968) Age and territory in the great tit (Parus m. major L.). Angewandte Ornithologie 3:20–24Google Scholar
  10. Dill LM (1978) An energy-based model of optimal feeding-territory size. Theor Pop Biol 14:396–429Google Scholar
  11. Dill LM, Ydenberg RG, Fraser AHG (1981) Food abundance and territory size in juvenile coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch). Can J Zool 59:1801–1809Google Scholar
  12. Dixon KL (1956) Territoriality and survival in the plain titmouse. Condor 58:169–182Google Scholar
  13. Ebersole JP (1980) Food density and territory size: An alternative model and a test on the reef fish (Eupomacentrus leucostictus). Am Nat 115:492–509Google Scholar
  14. Ewald PW, Carpenter FL (1978) Territorial responses to energy manipulations in the Anna hummingbird. Oecologia (Berlin) 31:277–292Google Scholar
  15. Ewald PW, Hunt GL, Warner M (1980) Territory size in Western gulls: Importance of intrusion pressure, defence invements and vegetation structure. Ecology 61:80–87Google Scholar
  16. Franzblau MA, Collins JP (1980) Test of a hypothesis of territory regulation in an insectivorous bird by experimentally increasing prey abundance. Oecologia (Berlin) 46:164–170Google Scholar
  17. Getty T (1979) On the benefits of aggression: The adaptiveness of inhibition and super-territories. Am Nat 114:605–609Google Scholar
  18. Harris RN (1979) Aggression, super-territories and reproductive success in tree swallows. Can J Zool 55:2072–2078Google Scholar
  19. Hixon MA (1980) Food production and competitor density as the determinants of feeding territory size. Am Nat 115:510–530Google Scholar
  20. Hixon MA (1981) An experimental analysis of territoriality in the California reef fish Embiotoca jacksoni (Embiotocidae). Copeia 1981:653–665Google Scholar
  21. Hixon MA (1982) Energy maximisers and time minimers: theory and reality. Am Nat 119:596–599Google Scholar
  22. Jones GP (1981) Spawning-site choice by female Pseudolabrus celidotus (Pisces: Labridae) and its influence on the mating system. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 8:129–142Google Scholar
  23. Jones GP (1983) The influence of habitat and behavioural interactions on the local distribution of the wrasse, Pseudolabrus celidotus. Env Biol Fish 9:in pressGoogle Scholar
  24. Kodric-Brown A, Brown JH (1978) Influence of economics, interspecific competition, and sexual dimorphism on territoriality of migrant rufous humming birds. Ecology 59:285–296Google Scholar
  25. Krebs JR (1971) Territory and breeding density in the great tit, Parus major. Ecology 52:2–22Google Scholar
  26. Larson RJ (1980) Territorial behavior of the black and yellow rockfish and gopher rockfish (Scorpaenidae, Sebastes). Mar Biol 58:111–122Google Scholar
  27. Leum LL, Choat JH (1980) Density and distribution patterns of the temperate marine fish Cheilodactylus spectabilis (Cheilodactylidae) in a reef environment. Mar Biol 57:327–337Google Scholar
  28. Lockie JD (1966) Territory in small carnivores. Symp Zool Soc Lond 18:143–165Google Scholar
  29. MacLean SF Jr, Seastedt TR (1979) Avian territoriality: sufficient resources of interference competition. Am Nat 114:308–312Google Scholar
  30. Mares MA, Lacher TE, Willig MR, Bitar NA, Adams R, Klinger A, Tazik D (1982) An experimental analysis of social spacing in Tamias striatus. Ecology 63:267–273Google Scholar
  31. Myers JP, Connors PG, Pitelka FA (1979) Territory size in winterling sanderlings: The effects of prey abundance and intruder density. The Auk 96:551–561Google Scholar
  32. Myers JP, Conners PG, Pitelka FA (1981) Optimal territory size and the sanderling: Compromises in a variable environment. In: Kamil AC and Sargent TD (eds), Foraging Behavior. Ecological, ethological and psychological approaches, Garland, New York, pp 135–158Google Scholar
  33. Nursall JR (1977) Territoriality in redlip blennies (Ophioblennius atlanticus — Pisces: Blenniidae). J Zool 182:205–223Google Scholar
  34. Odum EP, Kuenzler EJ (1955) Measurement of territory and home range size in birds. The Auk 72:128–137Google Scholar
  35. Peeke HVS, Herz MJ, Gallagher JE (1971) Changes in aggressive interaction in adjacently territorial convict cichlids (Cichlasoma nigrofasciatum): a study of habituation. Anim Behav 40:43–54Google Scholar
  36. Pleasants JM, Pleasants BY (1979) The super-territory hypothesis: a critique, or why there are so few bullies. Am Nat 114:609–614Google Scholar
  37. Ralph CJ, Pearson CA (1971) Correlation of age, size of territory, plumage and breeding success in white-crowned sparrows. Condor 73:77–80Google Scholar
  38. Root RB (1969) The behavior and reproductive success of blue-grey gnatcatcher. Condor 71:16–31Google Scholar
  39. Ross RM (1978) Territorial behavior and ecology of the anemone fish Amphiprion melanopus on Guam. Z Tierpsychol 46:71–83Google Scholar
  40. Sale PF (1975) Patterns of use of space in a guild of territorial reef fishes. Mar Biol 29:89–97Google Scholar
  41. Schoener TW (1971) Theory of feeding strategies. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 2:369–404Google Scholar
  42. Schoener TW (1983) Simple models of optimal feeding-territory size: a reconciliation. Am Nat 121:608–629Google Scholar
  43. Schoener TW, Schoener A (1980) Densities, sex ratio and population structure in four species of Bahamian Anolis lizards. J Anim Ecol 49:19–53Google Scholar
  44. Schoener TW, Schoener A (1982) Intraspecific variation in home range size in some Anolis lizards. Ecology 63:809–823Google Scholar
  45. Simon CA (1975) The influence of food abundance on territory size in the iguanid lizard Sceloporus jarrovi. Ecology 56:993–998Google Scholar
  46. Slaney PA, Northcote TG (1974) Effects of prey abundance on density and territorial behavior of young rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri) in laboratory stream channels. J Fish Res Board Can 31:1201–1209Google Scholar
  47. Stimson J (1973) The role of the territory in the ecology of the intertidal limpet Lottia gigantea (Gray). Ecology 54:1020–1030Google Scholar
  48. Taitt MJ (1981) The effect of extra food on small rodent populations: I. Deermice (Peromyscus maniculatus). J Anim Ecol 50:111–124Google Scholar
  49. Taitt MJ, Krebs CJ (1981) The effect of extra food on small rodent populations: II. Voles (Microtus townsendii). J Anim 50:125–137Google Scholar
  50. Tullock G (1979) On the adaptive significance of territoriality: comment. Am Nat 113:772–775Google Scholar
  51. Verner J (1977) On the adaptive significance of territoriality. Am Nat 111:769–775Google Scholar
  52. Watson A, Miller GR (1971) Territority size and aggression in a fluctuating red grouse population. J Anim Ecol 40:367–383Google Scholar
  53. Welsh DA (1975) Savannah sparrow breeding and territoriality on a Nova Scotia dune beach. Auk 92:235–251Google Scholar
  54. Wittenberger JF (1981) Animal social behavior. Duxbury, BostonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. D. Norman
    • 1
  • G. P. Jones
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of ZoologyUniversity of MelbourneParkvilleAustralia

Personalised recommendations