IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0037951.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Male Choice in the Stream-Anadromous Stickleback Complex

Author

Listed:
  • Jeffrey S McKinnon
  • Nick Hamele
  • Nicole Frey
  • Jennifer Chou
  • Leia McAleavey
  • Jess Greene
  • Windi Paulson

Abstract

Studies of mating preferences and pre-mating reproductive isolation have often focused on females, but the potential importance of male preferences is increasingly appreciated. We investigated male behavior in the context of reproductive isolation between divergent anadromous and stream-resident populations of threespine stickleback, Gasterosteus aculeatus, using size-manipulated females of both ecotypes. Specifically, we asked if male courtship preferences are present, and if they are based on relative body size, non-size aspects of ecotype, or other traits. Because male behaviors were correlated with each other, we conducted a principal components analysis on the correlations and ran subsequent analyses on the principal components. The two male ecotypes differed in overall behavioral frequencies, with stream-resident males exhibiting consistently more vigorous and positive courtship than anadromous males, and an otherwise aggressive behavior playing a more positive role in anadromous than stream-resident courtship. We observed more vigorous courtship toward smaller females by (relatively small) stream-resident males and the reverse pattern for (relatively large) anadromous males. Thus size-assortative male courtship preferences may contribute to reproductive isolation in this system, although preferences are far from absolute. We found little indication of males responding preferentially to females of their own ecotype independent of body size.

Suggested Citation

  • Jeffrey S McKinnon & Nick Hamele & Nicole Frey & Jennifer Chou & Leia McAleavey & Jess Greene & Windi Paulson, 2012. "Male Choice in the Stream-Anadromous Stickleback Complex," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(6), pages 1-8, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0037951
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0037951
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0037951
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0037951&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0037951?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Genevieve M. Kozak & Janette W. Boughman, 2009. "Learned conspecific mate preference in a species pair of sticklebacks," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 20(6), pages 1282-1288.
    2. Matthieu Delcourt & Katja Räsänen & Andrew P. Hendry, 2008. "Genetic and plastic components of divergent male intersexual behavior in Misty lake/stream stickleback," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 19(6), pages 1217-1224.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jason Keagy & Jean-François Savard & Gerald Borgia, 2012. "Cognitive ability and the evolution of multiple behavioral display traits," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 23(2), pages 448-456.
    2. Demetra Andreou & Christophe Eizaguirre & Thomas Boehm & Manfred Milinski, 2017. "Mate choice in sticklebacks reveals that immunogenes can drive ecological speciation," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 28(4), pages 953-961.
    3. Nathan W Bailey & Lucas Marie-Orleach & Allen J Moore & Leigh SimmonsEditor-in-Chief, 2018. "Indirect genetic effects in behavioral ecology: does behavior play a special role in evolution?," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 29(1), pages 1-11.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pone00:0037951. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.