Author
Listed:
- Chenke Zang
- Meng-Han Joseph Chung
- Teresa Neeman
- Lauren Harrison
- Ivan M Vinogradov
- Michael D Jennions
Abstract
Male–male contests for access to females or breeding resources are critical in determining male reproductive success. Larger males and those with more effective weaponry are more likely to win fights. However, even after controlling for such predictors of fighting ability, studies have reported a winner–loser effect: previous winners are more likely to win subsequent contests, while losers often suffer repeated defeats. While the effect of winning–losing is well-documented for the outcome of future fights, its effect on other behaviors (e.g. mating) remains poorly investigated. Here, we test whether a winning versus losing experience influenced subsequent behaviors of male mosquitofish (Gambusia holbrooki) toward rivals and potential mates. We housed focal males with either a smaller or larger opponent for 24 h to manipulate their fighting experience to become winners or losers, respectively. The focal males then underwent tests that required them to enter and swim through a narrow corridor to reach females, bypassing a cylinder that contained either a larger rival male (competitive scenario), a juvenile or was empty (non-competitive scenarios). The tests were repeated after 1 wk. Winners were more likely to leave the start area and to reach the females, but only when a larger rival was presented, indicating higher levels of risk-taking behavior in aggressive interactions. This winner–loser effect persisted for at least 1 wk. We suggest that male mosquitofish adjust their assessment of their own and/or their rival’s fighting ability following contests in ways whose detection by researchers depends on the social context.
Suggested Citation
Chenke Zang & Meng-Han Joseph Chung & Teresa Neeman & Lauren Harrison & Ivan M Vinogradov & Michael D Jennions, 2024.
"Does losing reduce the tendency to engage with rivals to reach mates? An experimental test,"
Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 35(4), pages 36-42.
Handle:
RePEc:oup:beheco:v:35:y:2024:i:4:p:36a-42a.
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:35:y:2024:i:4:p:36a-42a.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/beheco .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.