4.5 Article

Social system and reproduction of helpers in a cooperatively breeding cichlid fish (Julidochromis ornatus) in Lake Tanganyika:: field observations and parentage analyses

Journal

BEHAVIORAL ECOLOGY AND SOCIOBIOLOGY
Volume 58, Issue 5, Pages 506-516

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00265-005-0934-6

Keywords

cooperative breeding; helper; parentage analysis; microsatellites; reproductive skew models

Ask authors/readers for more resources

It is suggested that some fish of the genus Julidochromis, substrate-brooding Tanganyikan cichlids with biparental care, breed cooperatively with helpers. We studied the social system of J. ornatus in the wild and analysed genetic parentage using microsatellites. Within the studied population three patterns of social system were identified: monogamous pairs (61%, 44 of 72 groups), pairs with helpers (29%, 21), and polygamous harems with helpers (controlled by either a large female or large male owner; 10%, 7). In cooperatively breeding groups, the number of helpers at each nest ranged from 1 to 6 (median 1), and male helpers were more numerous than female helpers. In both sexes, the body size was different among individuals of different social status (harem owner > breeder > helper). Helpers and harem owners of both sexes exhibited brood defence although its frequency was low. The molecular analysis revealed that (1) the helpers were mostly unrelated to dominant breeders, (2) many helpers of both sexes contributed genetically to the next generations, (3) male helpers had high siring success (41 % of young in total), and (4) large young unrelated to group members were detected at 30% of observed nests, which may be due to breeder (or helper) replacements and immigration of young. We discuss the implications of these results for understanding the complex social system of this species, especially the low reproductive skew in comparison with other cooperatively breeding cichlids.

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