Table of Contents
International Journal of Evolutionary Biology
Volume 2012 (2012), Article ID 161306, 12 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/161306
Research Article

Species-Specific Relationships between Water Transparency and Male Coloration within and between Two Closely Related Lake Victoria Cichlid Species

1Theoretical Biology Group, Centre for Ecological and Evolutionary Studies (CEES), University of Groningen, P.O. Box 11103, 9700 CC Groningen, The Netherlands
2Department of Fish Ecology and Evolution, Eawag Centre of Ecology, Evolution and Biogeochemistry, Seestraße 79, 6047 Kastanienbaum, Switzerland
3Department of Aquatic Ecology, Institute of Ecology and Evolution, University of Bern, Baltzerstraße 6, CH-3012 Bern, Switzerland
4Sylvius Laboratory, Behavioural Biology, IBL, Leiden University, P.O. Box 9505, 2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands
5Behavioural Biology Group, Centre for Behaviour and Neurosciences, University of Groningen, P.O. Box 11103, 9700 CC Groningen, The Netherlands

Received 20 January 2012; Revised 28 March 2012; Accepted 12 April 2012

Academic Editor: Kristina M. Sefc

Copyright © 2012 Ruth F. Castillo Cajas et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. K. Marchetti, “Dark habitats and bright birds illustrate the role of the environment in species divergence,” Nature, vol. 362, no. 6416, pp. 149–152, 1993. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. J. A. Endler, “Signals, signal conditions, and the direction of evolution,” The American Naturalist, vol. 139, pp. S125–S153, 1992. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. A. V. Badyaev and E. S. Leaf, “Habitat associations of song characteristics in Phylloscopus and Hippolais warblers,” Auk, vol. 114, no. 1, pp. 40–46, 1997. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. J. A. Tobias, J. Aben, R. T. Brumfield et al., “Song divergence by sensory drive in amazonian birds,” Evolution, vol. 64, no. 10, pp. 2820–2839, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. J. R. Morrongiello, N. R. Bond, D. A. Crook, and B. B. M. Wong, “Nuptial coloration varies with ambient light environment in a freshwater fish,” Journal of Evolutionary Biology, vol. 23, no. 12, pp. 2718–2725, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. H. Slabbekoorn and T. B. Smith, “Bird song, ecology and speciation,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, vol. 357, no. 1420, pp. 493–503, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. S. M. Gray and J. S. McKinnon, “Linking color polymorphism maintenance and speciation,” Trends in Ecology & Evolution, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 71–79, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. J. W. Boughman, “How sensory drive can promote speciation,” Trends in Ecology & Evolution, vol. 17, no. 12, pp. 571–577, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. M. E. Maan and O. Seehausen, “Ecology, sexual selection and speciation,” Ecology Letters, vol. 14, no. 6, pp. 591–602, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. C. Richardson and T. Lengagne, “Multiple signals and male spacing affect female preference at cocktail parties in treefrogs,” Proceedings of the Royal Society B, vol. 277, no. 1685, pp. 1247–1252, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. A. G. Jones and N. L. Ratterman, “Mate choice and sexual selection: what have we learned since Darwin?” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 106, pp. 10001–10008, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. I. van der Sluijs, S. M. Gray, M. C. P. Amorim et al., “Communication in troubled waters: responses of fish communication systems to changing environments,” Evolutionary Ecology, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 623–640, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. O. Seehausen, J. J. M. van Alphen, and F. Witte, “Cichlid fish diversity threatened by eutrophication that curbs sexual selection,” Science, vol. 277, no. 5333, pp. 1808–1811, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. M. E. Maan, O. Seehausen, and J. J. M. van Alphen, “Female mating preferences and male coloration covary with water transparency in a Lake Victoria cichlid fish,” Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, vol. 99, no. 2, pp. 398–406, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. R. Lande, O. Seehausen, and J. J. M. van Alphen, “Mechanisms of rapid sympatric speciation by sex reversal and sexual selection in cichlid fish,” Genetica, vol. 112-113, pp. 435–443, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. M. J. Pauers, J. S. McKinnon, and T. J. Ehlinger, “Directional sexual selection on chroma and within-pattern colour contrast in Labeotropheus fuelleborni,” Proceedings of the Royal Society B, vol. 271, no. 6, pp. S444–S447, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. M. E. Maan, O. Seehausen, L. Söderberg et al., “Intraspecific sexual selection on a speciation trait, male coloration, in the Lake Victoria cichlid Pundamilia nyererei,” Proceedings of the Royal Society B, vol. 271, no. 1556, pp. 2445–2452, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. O. Seehausen and J. J. M. van Alphen, “The effect of male coloration on female mate choice in closely related Lake Victoria cichlids (Haplochromis nyererei complex),” Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 1–8, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. M. E. Knight and G. F. Turner, “Laboratory mating trials indicate incipient speciation by sexual selection among populations of the cichlid fish Pseudotropheus zebra from Lake Malawi,” Proceedings of the Royal Society B, vol. 271, no. 1540, pp. 675–680, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. B. Egger, K. Mattersdorfer, and K. M. Sefc, “Variable discrimination and asymmetric preferences in laboratory tests of reproductive isolation between cichlid colour morphs,” Journal of Evolutionary Biology, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 433–439, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. W. Okullo, T. Ssenyonga, B. Hamre et al., “Parameterization of the inherent optical properties of Murchison Bay, Lake Victoria,” Applied Optics, vol. 46, no. 36, pp. 8553–8561, 2007. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. O. Seehausen, Y. Terai, I. S. Magalhaes et al., “Speciation through sensory drive in cichlid fish,” Nature, vol. 455, no. 7213, pp. 620–626, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  23. N. Bouton, O. Seehausen, and J. J. M. van Alphen, “Resource partitioning among rock-dwelling haplochromines (Pisces: Cichlidae) from Lake Victoria,” Ecology of Freshwater Fish, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 225–240, 1997. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. J. A. Endler and A. E. Houde, “Geographic variation in female preferences for male traits in Poecilia reticulata,” Evolution, vol. 49, no. 3, pp. 456–468, 1995. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. M. E. Maan, K. D. Hofker, J. J. M. van Alphen, and O. Seehausen, “Sensory drive in cichlid speciation,” The American Naturalist, vol. 167, pp. 947–954, 2006. View at Google Scholar
  26. T. Levring and G. R. Fish, “The penetration of light in some tropical East-African waters,” Oikos, vol. 7, pp. 98–109, 1956. View at Google Scholar
  27. B. Egger, Y. Klaefiger, A. Theis, and W. Salzburger, “A sensory bias has triggered the evolution of egg-spots in cichlid fishes,” PLoS One, vol. 6, no. 10, Article ID e25601, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  28. W. Salzburger, T. Mack, E. Verheyen, and A. Meyer, “Out of Tanganyika: genesis, explosive speciation, key-innovations and phylogeography of the haplochromine cichlid fishes,” BMC Evolutionary Biology, vol. 5, p. 17, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  29. T. Goldschmidt, “Egg mimics in haplochromine cichlids (pisces, perciformes) from Lake Victoria,” Ethology, vol. 88, pp. 177–190, 1991. View at Google Scholar
  30. E. Hert, “The function of egg-spots in an African mouth-brooding cichlid fish,” Animal Behaviour, vol. 37, no. 5, pp. 726–732, 1989. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  31. K. L. Carleton, J. W. L. Parry, J. K. Bowmaker, D. M. Hunt, and O. Seehausen, “Colour vision and speciation in Lake Victoria cichlids of the genus Pundamilia,” Molecular Ecology, vol. 14, no. 14, pp. 4341–4353, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  32. C. M. Hofmann, K. E. O'Quin, N. J. Marshall, T. W. Cronin, O. Seehausen, and K. L. Carleton, “The eyes have it: regulatory and structural changes both underlie cichlid visual pigment diversity,” PLoS Biology, vol. 7, no. 12, Article ID e1000266, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  33. F. W. Munz and W. N. McFarland, “The significance of spectral position in the rhodopsins of tropical marine fishes,” Vision Research, vol. 13, no. 10, pp. 1829–1874, 1973. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  34. W. N. McFarland and F. W. Munz, “Part II: the photic environment of clear tropical seas during the day,” Vision Research, vol. 15, no. 10, pp. 1063–1070, 1975. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  35. J. A. Endler, “On the measurement and classification of colour in studies of animal colour patterns,” Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 315–352, 1990. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  36. A. F. Zuur, E. N. Ieno, N. J. Walker, A. A. Saveliev, and G. M. Smith, Mixed Effect Models and Extensions in Ecology with R, Springer, 2009.
  37. K. P. Burnham and D. R. Anderson, Model Selection and Multimodel Inference: A Practical Information—Theoretic Approach, Springer, 2002.
  38. R Development Core Team, R: A language and environment for statistical computing, 2011.
  39. M. Plenderleith, C. van Oosterhout, R. L. Robinson, and G. F. Turner, “Female preference for conspecific males based on olfactory cues in a Lake Malawi cichlid fish,” Biology Letters, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 411–414, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  40. M. N. Verzijden and C. Ten Cate, “Early learning influences species assortative mating preferences in Lake Victoria cichlid fish,” Biology Letters, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 134–136, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  41. K. P. Maruska and R. D. Fernald, “Contextual chemosensory urine signaling in an African cichlid fish,” Journal of Experimental Biology, vol. 215, no. 1, pp. 68–74, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  42. D. Osorio and A. D. Ham, “Spectral reflectance and directional properties of structural coloration in bird plumage,” Journal of Experimental Biology, vol. 205, no. 14, pp. 2017–2027, 2002. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  43. W. Wickler, “‘Egg-dummies’ as natural releasers in mouth-breeding cichlids,” Nature, vol. 194, no. 4833, pp. 1092–1093, 1962. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  44. A. Theis, W. Salzburger, and B. Egger, “The function of anal fin egg-spots in the cichlid fish Astatotilapia burtoni,” PLoS One, vol. 7, no. 1, Article ID e29878, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  45. E. Hert, “Female choice based on egg-spots in Pseudotropheus aurora Burgess 1976, a rock-dwelling cichlid of Lake Malawi, Africa,” Journal of Fish Biology, vol. 38, pp. 951–953, 1991. View at Google Scholar
  46. V. C. K. Couldridge, “Experimental manipulation of male eggspots demonstrates female preference for one large spot in Pseudotropheus lombardoi,” Journal of Fish Biology, vol. 60, no. 3, pp. 726–730, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  47. W. Salzburger, T. Mack, E. Verheyen, and A. Meyer, “Out of Tanganyika: genesis, explosive speciation, key-innovations and phylogeography of the haplochromine cichlid fishes,” BMC Evolutionary Biology, vol. 5, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  48. T. Goldschmidt and J. de Visser, “On the possible role of egg mimics in speciation,” Acta Biotheoretica, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 125–134, 1990. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  49. O. Seehausen, Lake Victoria Rock Cichlids: Taxonomy, Ecology, and Distribution, Verduijn, 1996.
  50. J. L. Kelley, B. Phillips, G. H. Cummins, and J. Shand, “Changes in the visual environment affect colour signal brightness and shoaling behaviour in a freshwater fish,” Animal Behaviour, vol. 83, no. 3, pp. 783–791, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  51. E. Lewandowski and J. Boughman, “Effects of genetics and light environment on colour expression in threespine sticklebacks,” Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, vol. 94, no. 4, pp. 663–673, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  52. M. E. Maan, M. van der Spoel, P. Quesada Jimenez, J. J. M. van Alphen, and O. Seehausen, “Fitness correlates of male coloration in a Lake Victoria cichlid fish,” Behavioral Ecology, vol. 17, no. 5, pp. 691–699, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  53. R. D. Fernald, “Quantitative behavioural observations of Haplochromis burtoni under semi-natural conditions,” Animal Behaviour, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 643–653, 1977. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  54. S. M. Gray, F. L. Hart, M. E. M. Tremblay, T. J. Lisney, and C. W. Hawryshyn, “The effects of handling time, ambient light, and anaesthetic method, on the standardized measurement of fish colouration,” Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, vol. 68, no. 2, pp. 330–342, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  55. T. D. Schultz, C. N. Anderson, and L. B. Symes, “The conspicuousness of colour cues in male pond damselflies depends on ambient light and visual system,” Animal Behaviour, vol. 76, no. 4, pp. 1357–1364, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  56. D. Gomez and M. Théry, “Influence of ambient light on the evolution of colour signals: comparative analysis of a Neotropical rainforest bird community,” Ecology Letters, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 279–284, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  57. D. L. Clark, J. A. Roberts, M. Rector, and G. W. Uetz, “Spectral reflectance and communication in the wolf spider, Schizocosa ocreata (Hentz): simultaneous crypsis and background contrast in visual signals,” Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, vol. 65, no. 6, pp. 1237–1247, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  58. M. E. Cummings, “Sensory trade-offs predict signal divergence in surfperch,” Evolution, vol. 61, no. 3, pp. 530–545, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  59. R. C. Fuller, “Lighting environment predicts the relative abundance of male colour morphs in bluefin killifish (Lucania goodei) populations,” Proceedings of the Royal Society B, vol. 269, no. 1499, pp. 1457–1465, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  60. S. M. Gray, L. M. Dill, F. Y. Tantu, E. R. Loew, F. Herder, and J. S. McKinnon, “Environment-contingent sexual selection in a colour polymorphic fish,” Proceedings of the Royal Society B, vol. 275, no. 1644, pp. 1785–1791, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  61. M. B. Dugas and N. R. Franssen, “Nuptial coloration of red shiners (Cyprinella lutrensis) is more intense in turbid habitats,” Naturwissenschaften, vol. 98, no. 3, pp. 247–251, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  62. M. C. Stoddard and R. O. Prum, “How colorful are birds? Evolution of the avian plumage color gamut,” Behavioral Ecology, vol. 22, pp. 1042–1052, 2011. View at Google Scholar
  63. C. Lindstedt, N. Morehouse, H. Pakkanen et al., “Characterizing the pigment composition of a variable warning signal of Parasemia plantaginis larvae,” Functional Ecology, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 759–766, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  64. G. F. Grether, J. Hudon, and D. F. Millie, “Carotenoid limitation of sexual coloration along an environmental gradient in guppies,” Proceedings of the Royal Society B, vol. 266, no. 1426, pp. 1317–1322, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  65. J. T. O. Kirk, Light and Photosynthesis in Aquatic Ecosystems, Cambridge University Press, 1994.
  66. P. A. Svensson and B. B. M. Wong, “Carotenoid-based signals in behavioural ecology: a review,” Behaviour, vol. 148, no. 2, pp. 131–189, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  67. J. K. Craig and C. J. Foote, “Countergradient variation and secondary sexual color: phenotypic convergence promotes genetic divergence in carotenoid use between sympatric anadromous and nonanadromous morphs of sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka),” Evolution, vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 380–391, 2001. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  68. S. R. Evans and B. C. Sheldon, “Quantitative genetics of a carotenoid-based color: heritability and persistent natal environmental effects in the great tit,” The American Naturalist, vol. 179, no. 1, pp. 79–94, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  69. G. G. Rosenthal, T. Y. F. Martinez, F. J. G. de León, and M. J. Ryan, “Shared preferences by predators and females for male ornaments in swordtails,” The American Naturalist, vol. 158, no. 2, pp. 146–154, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  70. M. E. Maan, B. Eshuis, M. P. Haesler, M. V. Schneider, J. J. M. van Alphen, and O. Seehausen, “Color polymorphism and predation in a Lake Victoria cichlid fish,” Copeia, no. 3, pp. 621–629, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  71. J. G. J. Godin and H. E. McDonough, “Predator preference for brightly colored males in the guppy: a viability cost for a sexually selected trait,” Behavioral Ecology, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 194–200, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  72. A. Moyaho, C. M. Garcia, and J. Manjarrez, “Predation risk is associated with the geographic variation of a sexually selected trait in a viviparous fish (Xenotoca variata),” Journal of Zoology, vol. 262, no. 3, pp. 265–270, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  73. J. J. Meager, T. Solbakken, A. C. Utne-Palm, and T. Oen, “Effects of turbidity on the reactive distance, search time, and foraging success of juvenile Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua),” Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, vol. 62, no. 9, pp. 1978–1984, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  74. U. Candolin, T. Salesto, and M. Evers, “Changed environmental conditions weaken sexual selection in sticklebacks,” Journal of Evolutionary Biology, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 233–239, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  75. M. Järvenpää and K. Lindström, “Water turbidity by algal blooms causes mating system breakdown in a shallow-water fish, the sand goby Pomatoschistus minutus,” Proceedings of the Royal Society B, vol. 271, no. 1555, pp. 2361–2365, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  76. J. Sundin, A. Berglund, and G. Rosenqvist, “Turbidity hampers mate choice in a pipefish,” Ethology, vol. 116, no. 8, pp. 713–721, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  77. P. O. Dunn, L. A. Whittingham, C. R. Freeman-Gallant, and J. DeCoste, “Geographic variation in the function of ornaments in the common yellowthroat Geothlypis trichas,” Journal of Avian Biology, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 66–72, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  78. G. F. Grether, G. R. Kolluru, F. H. Rodd, J. de la Cerda, and K. Shimazaki, “Carotenoid availability affects the development of a colour-based mate preference and the sensory bias to which it is genetically linked,” Proceedings of the Royal Society B, vol. 272, no. 1577, pp. 2181–2188, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  79. G. F. Grether, “Carotenoid limitation and mate preference evolution: a test of the indicator hypothesis in guppies (Poecilia reticulata),” Evolution, vol. 54, no. 5, pp. 1712–1724, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  80. T. D. Kocher, “Adaptive evolution and explosive speciation: the cichlid fish model,” Nature Reviews Genetics, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 288–298, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus