4.5 Article

Signal value of male courtship effort in a fish with paternal care

Journal

ANIMAL BEHAVIOUR
Volume 83, Issue 5, Pages 1153-1161

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2012.01.040

Keywords

courtship behaviour; mate preference; Pomatoschistus minutus; repeatability sand goby; sexual selection; sexual signalling; signal reliability

Funding

  1. Academy of Finland
  2. Department of Biology at the University of Turku

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Male courtship behaviour is known to correlate with body condition and other aspects of male phenotypic or genetic quality. Females often prefer males that express the most intense or elaborate displays, although recent findings indicate that this should not always be the case; males may be strategic in their courtship displays, signal dishonestly or deplete their energy reserves with intense courting. To study reliability of courtship effort as a mate choice signal, I assessed multiple aspects of male courtship using wild-caught sand gobies, Pomatoschistus minutus, in a controlled laboratory setting. I found consistent and repeatable between-male differences in courtship. However, females did not show a significant preference for males that courted intensively. Furthermore, other assessed male traits with a previously demonstrated role in sexual selection were not correlated with courtship effort. This indicates that courtship displays did not reliably signal male quality. The results also suggest that even when courtship has potential to convey useful information, females may have to trade between courtship and other cues they use in mate choice. Hence, to gain a more complete understanding of the selection regime acting on male courtship behaviour, and female preference for it, one should simultaneously investigate multiple factors that can affect female mating behaviour. (C) 2012 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available