IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v16y2005i4p818-822.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Species recognition by male swordtails via chemical cues

Author

Listed:
  • Bob B.M. Wong
  • Heidi S. Fisher
  • Gil G. Rosenthal

Abstract

Species recognition can often play a key role in female mating preferences. Far less is known about conspecific mate recognition from the male perspective. In many closely related taxa, females exhibit few obvious visual differences and males might have to attend to chemical cues in mate recognition, a possibility that has rarely been explored in vertebrates. Here, we examine male species recognition via odor cues in the swordtail fish, Xiphophorus birchmanni. In dichotomous choice experiments we first tested whether males respond to female odor cues. We found that males were attracted to conspecific female odor and those of a related allopatric congener, Xiphophorus malinche, over a water control. Males did not, however, respond to the female odor of the more distantly related sympatric platyfish, Xiphophorus variatus. We then gave male X. birchmanni the choice between conspecific and heterospecific female stimuli. Males, in this scenario, significantly preferred the conspecific odor when the alternative was platyfish. However, when offered odor cues of X. malinche, male X. birchmanni actually preferred the heterospecific female cue. The complex array of preferences reported here, previously documented only in females, underscores the need to consider the behavior of both sexes in dictating actual mating outcomes. Copyright 2005.

Suggested Citation

  • Bob B.M. Wong & Heidi S. Fisher & Gil G. Rosenthal, 2005. "Species recognition by male swordtails via chemical cues," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 16(4), pages 818-822, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:16:y:2005:i:4:p:818-822
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/ari058
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    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:16:y:2005:i:4:p:818-822. 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.

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