Subordinate removal affects parental investment, but not offspring survival in a cooperative cichlid

Summary Subordinates in cooperative breeding systems may provide help to dominant pairs, who can benefit by either an increased total investment in their current brood or a reduced personal contribution to this investment. In the social cichlid Julidochromis ornatus, one large male subordinate generally spends 90% of his time in close proximity to the breeding shelter, whereas the dominants only spend 50% of their time close to the shelter. We experimentally removed the large subordinate for 30 days (approximating one breeding cycle) to study the investment strategies of dominants and the effects on offspring survival, while accounting for subordinate immigration. Experimental groups were compared with control groups, from which subordinates were also caught but not removed. On day one following removal, we tested whether dominants overcompensated, fully compensated or undercompensated for absence of the subordinate on several parental behaviours. Moreover, we tested whether the pairs' potential compensatory behaviour remained high seven days following large subordinate removal. One day following removal, dominants increased their time spent in the territory and their frequency of breeding shelter visits and defence, compared with the pre-removal phase and control groups. The dominant pair overcompensated for the loss of subordinate help in their breeding shelter visits, fully compensated in defence and undercompensated their time spent in the territory. Seven days after large subordinate removal, behavioural differences between treatments had disappeared. However, when distinguishing between groups with or without a new immigrant subordinate, dominant pairs only diminished investment in the presence of an immigrant, suggesting a compensatory role of the large subordinate. Finally, survival of juvenile group members was not affected by the treatment. Our experiments indicate that the presence of a large subordinate does not increase the dominant pairs' current reproductive success, but instead allows them to reduce their personal contribution to investment in the current brood. In addition, we illustrate that dominants may show strikingly different compensatory responses depending on the type of behaviour and emphasize the importance of immigrant subordinates to relieve dominants from costly compensatory responses in cooperative breeding systems.

The quantitative genetic basis of offspring solicitation and parental response in a passerine bird with biparental care

The coevolution of parental investment and offspring solicitation is driven by partly different evolutionary interests of genes expressed in parents and their offspring. In species with biparental care, the outcome of this conflict ma!: be influenced by the sexual conflict over parental investment, Models for the resolution of such family conflicts have made so far untested assumptions about genetic variation and covariation in the parental resource provisioning response and the level of offspring solicitation. Using a combination of cross-fostering and begging playback experiments, we show that, in the great tit (Parus major), (i) the begging call intensity of nestlings depends on their common origin, suggesting genetic variation for this begging display, (ii) only mothers respond to begging calls by increased food provisioning, and (iii! the size of the parental response is positively related to the begging call intensity of nestlings in the maternal but not paternal line. This study indicates that genetic covariation, its differential expression in the maternal and paternal lines and/or early environmental and parental effects need to be taken into account when predicting the phenotypic outcome of the conflict over investment between genes expressed in each parent and the offspring. [References: 36]

Asymmetric sexual conflict over parental care in a biparental cichlid

Theoretical models predict that parents should adjust the amount of care both to their own and their partner's body condition. In most biparental species, parental duties are switched repeatedly allowing for repeated mutual adjustment of the amount of care. In the mouthbrooding cichlid Eretmodus cyanostictus, terms are switched only once with females taking the first share. The timing of the shift of the clutch between mates strongly determines both partners' brooding period and thereby their parental investment. Females signal their readiness to transfer the young several days before the male finally takes them, suggesting sexual conflict over the timing of the shift. In a lab experiment, we reduced the body condition of either the female or the male of a pair to test whether energy reserves affect the timing of the shift and whether female signalling behaviour depends on energetic state. Males with a lowered condition took the young later and incubated for a shorter period, which prolonged the incubation time of their female partners. When female condition was lowered, female and male incubation durations remained unchanged, although females signalled their readiness to shift more intensely. Our results suggest that males adjust their parental investment to own energy reserves but are unresponsive to their mate's condition. Females appear to carry the entire costs for the male's adjustment of care. We propose that intrinsic asymmetries in the scope for mutual adjustment of parental investment and the costs of negotiation crucially influence solutions of the conflict between sexes over care.