4.4 Article

Variability of GnRH secretion in two goby species with socially controlled alternative male mating tactics

期刊

HORMONES AND BEHAVIOR
卷 50, 期 1, 页码 107-117

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.yhbeh.2006.01.011

关键词

alternative male mating tactics; male sexual phenotypes; preoptic GnRH; grass goby; black goby

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Male reproductive phenotypic plasticity related to environmental-social conditions is common among teleost fish. In several species, males adopt different mating tactics depending on their size, monopolizing mates when larger, while parasitizing dominant male spawns when smaller. Males performing alternative mating tactics are often characterized by a strong dimorphism in both primary and secondary reproductive traits. According to studies on sex-changing species and on species where only one male morph is reproductively active, male alternative phenotypes are expected to vary also in gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) neurons in forebrain preoptic area (POA). Here, we compared the intra- and inter-sexual variations in number and size of GnRH neurons, along with gonads and male accessory structure investment, in two goby species, the grass goby, Zosterisessor ophiocephalus, and the black goby, Gobius niger, characterized by male alternative mating phenotypes. In both species, older and larger males defend nests, court and perform parental care, while younger and smaller ones try to sneak territorial male spawning. We found that grass goby and black goby have different patterns of GnRH expression. Grass goby presents a clear intra-sexual dimorphism in GnRH expression, related to the occurrence of alternative mating tactics, while in the black goby, only inter-sexual differences are observed. The inter- and intra-specific variability in the GnRH neurons in these two goby species is discussed in light of the differences in migratory behavior, nest type, and mating system. (c) 2006 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据