Dataset Information

Variation in social systems within Chaetodon butterflyfishes, with special reference to pair bonding.

ABSTRACT: For many animals, affiliative relationships such as pair bonds form the foundation of society and are highly adaptive. Animal systems amenable for comparatively studying pair bonding are important for identifying underlying biological mechanisms, but mostly exist in mammals. Better establishing fish systems will enable comparison of pair bonding mechanisms across taxonomically distant lineages that may reveal general underlying mechanistic principles. We examined the utility of wild butterflyfishes (f: Chaetodontidae; g: Chaetodon) for comparatively studying pair bonding. Using stochastic character mapping, we provide the first analysis of the evolutionary history of butterflyfish sociality, revealing that pairing is ancestral, with at least seven independent transitions to gregarious grouping and solitary behavior since the late Miocene. We then formally verified social systems in six sympatric and wide-spread species representing a clade with one ancestrally reconstructed transition from paired to solitary grouping at Lizard Island, Australia. In situ observations of the size, selective affiliation and aggression, fidelity, and sex composition of social groups confirmed that Chaetodon baronessa, C. lunulatus, and C. vagabundus are predominantly pair bonding, whereas C. rainfordi, C. plebeius, and C. trifascialis are predominantly solitary. Even in the predominantly pair bonding species, C. lunulatus, a proportion of adults (15%) are solitary. Importantly, inter- and intra-specific differences in social systems do not co-vary with other previously established attributes, including parental care. Hence, the proposed butterflyfish populations are promising for inter- and intra-species comparative analyses of pair bonding and its mechanistic underpinnings. Avenues for further developing the system are proposed, including determining whether the aforementioned utility of these species applies across their geographic disruptions.

SUBMITTER: Nowicki JP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5894994 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThere are a number of unresolved issues in the design of experiments in greenhouses. They include whether statistical designs should be used and, if so, which designs should be used. Also, are there thigmomorphogenic or other effects arising from the movement of plants on conveyor belts within a greenhouse? A two-phase, single-line wheat experiment involving four tactics was conducted in a conventional greenhouse and a fully-automated phenotyping greenhouse (Smarthouse) to investigate these issues.Results and discussionAnalyses of our experiment show that there was a small east-west trend in total area of the plants in the Smarthouse. Analyses of the data from three multiline experiments reveal a large north-south trend. In the single-line experiment, there was no evidence of differences between trios of lanes, nor of movement effects. Swapping plant positions during the trial was found to decrease the east-west trend, but at the cost of increased error variance. The movement of plants in a north-south direction, through a shaded area for an equal amount of time, nullified the north-south trend. An investigation of alternative experimental designs for equally-replicated experiments revealed that generally designs with smaller blocks performed best, but that (nearly) trend-free designs can be effective when blocks are larger.ConclusionsTo account for variation in microclimate in a greenhouse, using statistical design and analysis is better than rearranging the position of plants during the experiment. For the relocation of plants to be successful requires that plants spend an equal amount of time in each microclimate, preferably during comparable growth stages. Even then, there is no evidence that this will be any more precise than statistical design and analysis of the experiment, and the risk is that it will not be successful at all. As for statistical design and analysis, it is best to use either (i) smaller blocks, (ii) (nearly) trend-free arrangement of treatments with a linear trend term included in the analysis, or, as a last resort, (iii) blocks of several complete rows with trend terms in the analysis. Also, we recommend that the greenhouse arrangement parallel that in the Smarthouse, but with randomization where appropriate.

Dataset Information

Variation in social systems within Chaetodon butterflyfishes, with special reference to pair bonding.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets