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.

Geographic variation in the behaviour of the cleaner fish Labroides dimidiatus (Labridae)

Geographical variation in the outcome of interspecific interactions has a range of proximate ecological causes. For instance, cleaning interactions between coral reef fishes can result in benefits for both the cleaner and its clients. However, because both parties can cheat and because the rewards of cheating may depend on the local abundance of ectoparasites on clients, the interaction might range from exploitative to mutualistic. In a comparative analysis of behavioural measures of the association between the cleaner fish Labroides dimidiatus and all its client species, we compared cleaning interactions between two sites on the Great Barrier Reef that differ with respect to mean ectoparasite abundance. At Heron Island, where client fish consistently harbour fewer ectoparasites, client species that tended to pose for cleaners were more likely to receive feeding bites by cleaners than client species that did not pose for cleaners. This was not the case at Lizard Island, where ectoparasites are significantly more abundant. Client fish generally spent more time posing for cleaners at Lizard Island than their conspecifics at Heron Island. However, fish at Heron Island were inspected longer on average by cleaners than conspecifics at Lizard Island, and they incurred more bites and swipes at their sides per unit time from cleaners. These and other differences between the two sites suggest that the local availability of ectoparasites as a food source for cleaners may determine whether clients will seek cleaning, and whether cleaners will feed on parasites or attempt to feed on client mucus. The results suggest that cleaning symbiosis is a mosaic of different outcomes driven by geographical differences in the benefits for both participants.

Parasite distribution on client reef fish determines cleaner fish foraging patterns

Recent evidence suggests that cleaner fish Labroides dimidiatus effectively control parasite densities on client reef fish that actively visit them to have parasites and dead or infected tissue removed. These findings support the hypothesis that clients benefit from cleaning, However, they do not show how cleaners reduce the parasite load of their clients. Cleaners could selectively feed on parasites or parasite removal could be a side product of cleaners foraging indifferently on the client surface, resulting in the removal of healthy mucus and scales also. To investigate cleaner fish foraging behaviour, we infected individuals of the surgeon fish Ctenochaetus striatus, with parasitic monogeneans on one body side, while the other body side was parasite free. We then allowed these clients to interact with L, dimidiatus. We found that the duration of interactions depended on parasite load, and that cleaners spent both more time and took more bites per time unit on the infected than on the uninfected side, Our data thus support the idea that parasite abundance determines food patch quality for cleaners. The overall outcome of cleaning interactions is thus likely to benefit the clients.

The effect of the cleaner fish Labroides dimidiatus on the capsalid monogenean Benedenia lolo parasite of the labrid fish Hemigymnus melapterus

The cleaner fish Labroides dimidiatus affected the pigmented monogenean parasite Benedenia lolo on the fish Hemigymnus melapterus (Labridae) held in aquaria. The effect of cleaner fish varied with the size class of fish; only small fish [a posteriori size class < 11-5 cm standard length (L-S)] exposed to cleaner fish had fewer monogeneans compared with fish not exposed to cleaner fish. The abundance of monogeneans on large fish (a posteriori size class > 11-5 cut L-S) was not affected by cleaner fish. The size-frequency distributions of monogeneans on both size-classes of H. melapterus were affected by cleaner fish. Fish exposed to cleaner fish had fewer large (> 3 mm) and more small (< 1 mm) monogeneans than fish not exposed to cleaner fish, suggesting cleaner fish selectively removed larger monogeneans. This difference was more pronounced on large fish. In the absence of cleaner fish, small fish had almost as many monogeneans as large fish; they also had more small monogeneans than the large fish, suggesting small fish were more vulnerable to infection by monogeneans than larger fish. This suggests that the cleaner fish L. dimidiatus has the potential to control benedeniine monogeneans on captive fish and highlights the importance of taking into account fish size in studies of the effect of cleaner fish on ectoparasites. (C) 2002 The Fisheries Society of the British Isles. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Cleaner fish drives local fish diversity on coral reefs

Coral reefs are one of the most diverse habitats in the world [1], yet our understanding of the processes affecting their biodiversity is limited [1-3]. At the local scale, cleaner fish are thought to have a disproportionate effect, in relation to their abundance and size, on the activity of many other fish species, but confirmation of this species' effect on local fish diversity has proved elusive. The cleaner fish Labroides dimidiatus has major effects on fish activity patterns [4] and may indirectly affect fish demography through the removal of large numbers of parasites [5, 6]. Here we show that small reefs where L. dimidiatus had been experimentally excluded for 18 months had half the species diversity of fish and one-fourth the abundance of individuals. Only fish that move among reefs, however, were affected. These fish include large species that themselves can affect other reef organisms [2, 7]. In contrast, the distribution of resident fish was not affected by cleaner fish. Thus, many fish appear to choose reefs based on the presence of cleaner fish. Our findings indicate that a single small [8] and not very abundant [9] fish has a strong influence on the movement patterns, habitat choice, activity, and local diversity and abundance of a wide variety of reef fish species.

Arginine vasotocin regulation of interspecific cooperative behaviour in a cleaner fish

In an interspecific cooperative context, individuals must be prepared to tolerate close interactive proximity to other species but also need to be able to respond to relevant social stimuli in the most appropriate manner. The neuropeptides vasopressin and oxytocin and their non-mammalian homologues have been implicated in the evolution of sociality and in the regulation of social behaviour across vertebrates. However, little is known about the underlying physiological mechanisms of interspecific cooperative interactions. In interspecific cleaning mutualisms, interactions functionally resemble most intraspecific social interactions. Here we provide the first empirical evidence that arginine vasotocin (AVT), a non-mammalian homologue of arginine vasopressin (AVP), plays a critical role as moderator of interspecific behaviour in the best studied and ubiquitous marine cleaning mutualism involving the Indo-Pacific bluestreak cleaner wrasse Labroides dimidiatus. Exogenous administration of AVT caused a substantial decrease of most interspecific cleaning activities, without similarly affecting the expression of conspecific directed behaviour, which suggests a differential effect of AVT on cleaning behaviour and not a general effect on social behaviour. Furthermore, the AVP-V1a receptor antagonist (manning compound) induced a higher likelihood for cleaners to engage in cleaning interactions and also to increase their levels of dishonesty towards clients. The present findings extend the knowledge of neuropeptide effects on social interactions beyond the study of their influence on conspecific social behaviour. Our evidence demonstrates that AVT pathways might play a pivotal role in the regulation of interspecific cooperative behaviour and conspecific social behaviour among stabilized pairs of cleaner fish. Moreover, our results suggest that the role of AVT as a neurochemical regulator of social behaviour may have been co-opted in the evolution of cooperative behaviour in an interspecific context, a hypothesis that is amenable to further testing on the potential direct central mechanism involved.

Cleaner fish use tactile dancing behavior as a preconflict management strategy

The most commonly asked question about cooperative interactions is how they are maintained when cheating is theoretically more profitable [1]. In cleaning interactions, where cleaners remove parasites from apparently cooperating clients, the classical question asked is why cleaner fish can clean piscivorous client fish without being eaten, a problem Trivers [2] used to explain reciprocal altruism. Trivers [2] suggested that predators refrain from eating cleaners only when the repeated removal of parasites by a particular cleaner results in a greater benefit than eating the cleaner. Although several theoretical models have examined cheating behavior in clients [3,4], no empirical tests have been done (but see Darcy [5]). It has been observed that cleaners are susceptible to predation [6, 7]. Thus, cleaners should have evolved strategies to avoid conflict or being eaten. In primates, conflicts are often resolved with conflict or preconflict management behavior [8]. Here, I show that cleaner fish tactically stimulate clients while swimming in an oscillating dancing manner (tactile dancing) more when exposed to hungry piscivorous clients than satiated ones, regardless of the client's parasite load. Tactile dancing thus may function as a preconflict management strategy that enables cleaner fish to avoid conflict with potentially dangerous clients.

Cleaner fish, Labroides dimidiatus, diet preferences for different types of mucus and parasitic gnathiid isopods

Cleaner fish, Labroides dimidiatus, prefer the mucus of the parrotfish, Chlorurus sordidus, to parasitic gnathiid isopods, the main items in their diet, indicating a major conflict between clients and cleaners over what the latter should eat during interactions. We tested whether the conflict varied with client species (and the quality of its mucus) and with the presence of blood in the gnathfids. First, we offered cleaners the choice between mucus of the parrotfish and that of the snapper, Lutjanus fulviflamma. When offered equal amounts of mucus on Plexiglas plates, cleaners readily developed a significant preference for the parrotfish mucus. Reducing the amount of parrotfish mucus by 75% made the preference disappear. In a second test, we offered the cleaners gnathiids that were or were not engorged with client fish blood. Cleaners showed no significant preference for either food item. Our results suggest that the degree of conflict between cleaners and clients may vary between species, depending on whether the latter have a preferred mucus. In contrast, the cleaners' lack of preference for engorged gnathiids benefits clients because it means that cleaners do not hesitate to eat unengorged gnathiids before the gnathiids harm the fish by removing blood or by transmitting blood parasites. (C) 2004 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Cleaner fish become hosts: a novel form of parasite transmission

Adult bucephalid trematodes (Digenea) generally only occur in piscivorous fish. Within labrid fishes they are very rare, however, we have found them in labrid cleaner fish that feed on the ectoparasites of fish. We surveyed 969 labrid fishes from the tropical Pacific and found bucephalids only in cleaners (Lahroides dimidiatus, L. bicolor, and Bodianus axillaris) and none in piscivores. The prevalences of bucephalids in L. dimidiatus at Lizard Island, Heron Island, Orpheus Island (all on the Great Barrier Reef), New Caledonia, and Moorea (French Polynesia) were 51, 47, 67, 56, and 67%, respectively. All of the L. bicolor examined from Moorea were infected. Bucephalids were highly prevalent in all size classes of L. dimidiatus from Lizard Island. Bucephalids were found in a 1.6-cm long juvenile L. dimidiatus, in which, piscivory is highly unlikely. We examined the literature on the worldwide bucephalid fauna in labrids and all hosts were found to be cleaners (Symphodus tinca, S. mediterraneus, L. dimidiatus, L. bicolor, and Bodianus axillaris) except Notolabrus parilus, whose ecology is unknown. We suggest that cleaners eat bucephalid metacercariae directly from the exterior surface of client fish during cleaning interactions. This is the first evidence of digeneans in the diet of L. dimidiatus, and the first study to show this novel form of parasite transmission where infective stages are eaten as a result of cleaning behaviour. Cleaning-mediated parasite transmission may result in behavioural modification of second intermediate hosts because clients and parasites both benefit from transmission. If the infection is costly to cleaners and acquired during cheating behaviour, then this parasite might regulate mutualism. Alternatively, if infective stages are targeted, infection by these bucephalids may be a negative consequence of an honest foraging strategy.

Does client size affect cleaner fish choice of client? An empirical test using client fish models

To determine whether the choice of client fishes in the cleaner fish Labroides dimidiatus was influenced by client size, cleaner fish were given a choice of equal amount of food spread on large and small client redfin butterflyfish Chaetodon trifasciatus models. All large models received bites from cleaners compared to 27% for small models. Seventy-nine per cent of cleaners took their first bite from the large fish model. The results suggest that client size may affect cleaner fish choice.

Image scoring and cooperation in a cleaner fish mutualism

Humans are highly social animals and often help unrelated individuals that may never reciprocate the altruist's favour(1-5). This apparent evolutionary puzzle may be explained by the altruist's gain in social image: image-scoring bystanders, also known as eavesdroppers, notice the altruistic act and therefore are more likely to help the altruist in the future(5-7). Such complex indirect reciprocity based on altruistic acts may evolve only after simple indirect reciprocity has been established, which requires two steps. First, image scoring evolves when bystanders gain personal benefits from information gathered, for example, by finding cooperative partners(8-10). Second, altruistic behaviour in the presence of such bystanders may evolve if altruists benefit from access to the bystanders. Here, we provide experimental evidence for both of the requirements in a cleaning mutualism involving the cleaner fish Labroides dimidiatus. These cleaners may cooperate and remove ectoparasites from clients or they may cheat by feeding on client mucus(11,12). As mucus may be preferred over typical client ectoparasites(13), clients must make cleaners feed against their preference to obtain a cooperative service. We found that eavesdropping clients spent more time next to 'cooperative' than 'unknown cooperative level' cleaners, which shows that clients engage in image-scoring behaviour. Furthermore, trained cleaners learned to feed more cooperatively when in an `image-scoring' than in a 'non-image-scoring' situation.