Asymmetric cheating opportunities and partner control in a cleaner fish mutualism

How can cooperation persist if, for one partner, cheating is more profitable than cooperation in each round, while the other partner has no option to cheat? Our laboratory experiments suggest that such a situation exists between the cleaner fish Labroides dimidiatus and its nonpredatory client reef fish species, which actively seek cleaners to have their ectoparasites removed. Clients Ctenochaetus striatus regularly jolted in response to cleaner mouth contact, and these jolts were not linked to the removal of parasites. In addition, cleaners did not search for parasites but fed on mucus when exposed to anaesthetized clients, which could not control the cleaners' behaviour. Field data showed that clients often terminated an interaction immediately after a jolt. Client species with access to only one cleaning station, owing to their small territories or home ranges, terminated interactions mainly by chasing cleaners while clients with access to two or more cleaning stations mainly swam away. Thus, the chasing of cleaners appeared to be a form of punishment, imposing costs on the cleaner at the client's (momentary) expense. Chasing yields future benefits, as jolts were on average less frequent during interactions between cleaners and individuals that had terminated their previous interaction by aggressive chasing. 2002 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour.

Cleaner fish Labroides dimidiatus recognise familiar clients

Individual recognition has been attributed a crucial role in the evolution of complex social systems such as helping behaviour and cooperation. A classical example for interspecific cooperation is the mutualism between the cleaner fish Labroides dimidiatus and its client reef fish species. For stable cooperation to evolve, it is generally assumed that partners interact repeatedly and remember each other's past behaviour. Repeated interactions may be achieved by site fidelity or individual recognition. However, as some cleaner fish have more than 2,300 interactions per day with various individuals per species and various species of clients, basic assumptions of cooperation theory might be violated in this mutualism. We tested the cleaner L. dimidiatus and its herbivorous client, the surgeon fish Ctenochaetus striatus, for their ability to distinguish between a familiar and an unfamiliar partner in a choice experiment. Under natural conditions, cleaners and clients have to build up their relationship, which is probably costly for both. We therefore predicted that both clients and cleaners should prefer the familiar partner in our choice experiment. We found that cleaners spent significantly more time near the familiar than the unfamiliar clients in the first 2 minutes of the experiment. This indicates the ability for individual recognition in cleaners. In contrast, the client C. striatus showed no significant preference. This could be due to a sampling artefact, possibly due to a lack of sufficient motivation. Alternatively, clients may not need to recognise their cleaners but instead remember the defined territories of L. dimidiatus to achieve repeated interactions with the same individual.

Cleaner fish Labroides dimidiatus reduce 'temporary" parasitic corallanid isopods on the coral reef fish Hemigymnus melapterus

To determine if cleaners affect 'temporary' parasitic corallanid isopods (Argathona macronema) on fish, we used caged fish Hemigymnus meldpterus (Labridae) on 5 patch reefs on Lizard Island, Great Barrier Reef, and removed all cleaner fish Labroides dimidiatus (Labridae) from 3 of the reefs, In a short-term experiment, fish were sampled after 12 or 24 h, at dawn and sunset respectively, and in a long-term experiment they were sampled after 12 d at sunset. Isopod prevalence, abundance and size were measured. In the short-term experiment, on reefs without cleaners the prevalence of A. macronema was higher after 24 h than after 12 h while on reefs with cleaners, prevalence was low at all times, Although the abundance of A, macronema did not vary after 12 and 24 h, when combined over the 24 h, the effect of cleaners was significant with only 2 % of all the A. macronema found on reefs with cleaners. Cleaners had no effect on the size frequency distribution of A. macronema in the short-term experiment, most likely because fish had so few isopods on reef with cleaners. In the longer-term experiment, the effects of cleaners on isopod prevalence and abundance were less clear. Their effect on isopod size was, however, significant with smaller parasites on reefs without cleaners. The reduction of isopod prevalence and abundance by cleaner fish over a period of hours may explain why these A, macronema are rare on wild fish. Our findings support the idea that cleaning is beneficial to clients and has important implications for the control of parasites of fish farmed in cages,

Experimental evidence that partner choice is a driving force in the payoff distribution among cooperators or mutualists: the cleaner fish case

Supply and demand largely determine the price of goods on human markets. It has been proposed that in animals, similar forces influence the payoff distribution between trading partners in Sexual selection, intraspecific cooperation and interspecific mutualism. Here we present the first experimental evidence supporting biological market theory in it study on cleaner fish, Labroides dimidiatus. Cleaners interact with two classes of clients: choosy client species with access to several cleaners usually do not queue for service and do not return if ignored, while resident client species with access to only one cleaning station do queue or return. We used plexiglas plates with equal amounts of food to stimulate these behaviours of the two client classes. Cleaners soon inspected 'choosy' plates before 'resident' plates. This supports previous field observations that suggest that client species with access to several cleaners exert choice to receive better(immediate) service.