Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31684856›Full record

ArticleBMC evolutionary biology2019

Nest defense in the face of cuckoldry: evolutionary rather than facultative adaptation to chronic paternity loss.

Holger Zimmermann, Karoline Fritzsche, Jonathan M Henshaw, Cyprian Katongo, Taylor Banda, Lawrence Makasa, Kristina M Sefc, Aneesh P H Bose

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC evolutionary biology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Single fathers sacrifice their broods and re-mate quickly in a socially monogamous cichlid.Behavioral ecology : official journal of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Holger ZimmermannInstitute of Biology, University of Graz, Universitätsplatz 2, 8010, Graz, Austria.
Karoline FritzscheInstitute of Biology, University of Graz, Universitätsplatz 2, 8010, Graz, Austria.
Jonathan M HenshawInstitute of Biology, University of Graz, Universitätsplatz 2, 8010, Graz, Austria.
Cyprian KatongoDepartment of Biological Sciences, University of Zambia, Great East Road Campus, P.O. Box 32379, Lusaka, Zambia.
Taylor BandaLake Tanganyika Research Unit, Department of Fisheries, Ministry of Fisheries and Livestock, P. O. Box 420055, Mpulungu, Zambia.
Lawrence MakasaLake Tanganyika Research Unit, Department of Fisheries, Ministry of Fisheries and Livestock, P. O. Box 420055, Mpulungu, Zambia.
Kristina M SefcInstitute of Biology, University of Graz, Universitätsplatz 2, 8010, Graz, Austria. kristina.sefc@uni-graz.at.ORCID 0000-0001-8108-8339
Aneesh P H BoseInstitute of Biology, University of Graz, Universitätsplatz 2, 8010, Graz, Austria. abose@orn.mpg.de.
University of Graz · ATMinistry of Agriculture and Livestock · ZMUniversity of Idaho · USUniversity of Zambia · ZM

Funding

Austrian Science Fund FWF P 27605
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRaising unrelated offspring is typically wasteful of parental resources and so individuals are expected to reduce or maintain low levels of parental effort when their parentage is low. This can involve facultative, flexible adjustments of parental care to cues of lost parentage in the current brood, stabilizing selection for a low level of paternal investment, or an evolutionary reduction in parental investment in response to chronically low parentage.

resultsWe studied parental care in Variabilichromis moorii, a socially monogamous, biparental cichlid fish, whose mating system is characterized by frequent cuckoldry and whose primary form of parental care is offspring defense. We combine field observations with genetic parentage analyses to show that while both parents defend their nest against intruding con- and hetero-specifics, males and females may do so for different reasons. Males in the study group (30 breeding pairs) sired 0-100% (median 83%) of the fry in their nests. Males defended less against immediate threats to the offspring, and more against threats to their territories, which are essential for the males' future reproductive success. Males also showed no clear relationship between their share of defense and their paternity of the brood. Females, on the other hand, were related to nearly all the offspring under their care, and defended almost equally against all types of threats.

conclusionOverall, males contributed less to defense than females and we suggest that this asymmetry is the result of an evolutionary response by males to chronically high paternity loss in this species. Although most males in the current study group achieved high parentage in their nests, the average paternity in V. moorii, sampled across multiple seasons, is only about 55%. We highlight the importance and complexity of studying nest defense as a form of parental care in systems where defense may serve not only to protect current offspring, but also to ensure future reproductive success by maintaining a territory.

Indexed as

Adaptation, PhysiologicalAnimalsBiological EvolutionBreedingCichlidsFemaleMalePaternal BehaviorReproductionSeasonsSexual Behavior, AnimalCichlidMultiple paternityParental careParental investmentPaternal care adjustmentVariabilichromis moorii

Identifiers

PMID31684856
PMCPMC6829816
OpenAlexW2987230026

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.