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.

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 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,

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.

Parasite infection rather than tactile stimulation is the proximate cause of cleaning behaviour in reef fish

Cleaning behavior is a popular example of non-kin cooperation. However, quantitative support for this is generally sparse and the alternative, that cleaners are parasitic: has also been proposed. Although the behaviour involves some of the most complex and highly developed interspecific communication signals known, the proximate causal factors for why clients Seek cleaners are controversial. However, this information is essential to understanding the evolution of cleaning. I tested whether clients seek cleaners in response to parasite infection or whether clients seek cleaners for tactile stimulation regardless of parasite load. Parasite loads oil client fish were manipulated and clients exposed to cleaner fish and control fish hehind glass. I found that parasitized client fish spent more time than unparasitized fish next to a cleaner fish. In addition; parasitized clients spent more rime next to cleaners than next to control fish whereas unparasitized fish were not attracted to cleaners. This study shows, I believe for the first time, which is somewhat surprising, that parasite infection alone causes clients to seek cleaning by cleaners and provides insight into how this behaviour evolved.

Cleaning symbioses from the parasites' perspective

Cleaning behaviour has generally been viewed from the cleaner or client's point of view. Few studies, however, have examined cleaning behaviour from the parasites' perspective, yet they are the equally-important third players in such associations. All three players are likely to have had their evolution affected by the association. As cleaner organisms are important predators of parasites, cleaners are likely to have an important effect on their prey. Little, however, is known of how parasites are affected by cleaning associations and the strategies that parasites use in response to cleaners. I examine here what parasites are involved in cleaning interactions, the effect cleaners have on parasites, the potential counter-adaptations that parasites have evolved against the predatory activities of cleaner organisms, the potential influence of cleaners on the life history traits of parasites, and other factors affected by cleaners. I have found that a wide range of ectoparasites from diverse habitats have been reported to interact with a wide range of cleaner organisms. Some of the life history traits of parasites are consistent with the idea that they are in response to cleaner predation. It is clear, however, that although many cleaning systems exist their ecological role is largely unexplored. This has likely been hindered by our lack of information on the parasites involved in cleaning interactions.

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.

Emergence rates from the benthos of the parasitic juveniles of gnathiid isopods

Variation in the rate at which parasitic gnathiid isopod juveniles emerged from the benthos at Lizard Island, Great Barrier Reef, Australia, was examined (I) every 4 or 8 h throughout the day and night over a 24 h period, (2) over a 12 h period during the day or night, and (3) during different lunar phases (weeks). The number of gnathiids sampled per 4 or 8 h was low, with only 30% of the traps containing gnathiids and the abundance ranging from 0 to 3 gnathiids m(-2). The number of gnathiids that emerged over 12 h, in contrast, ranged from 0 to 36 m(-2). During the third and fifth weeks sampled, more gnathiids emerged during the day than at night. This coincided with the full moon and new moon. Most gnathiids that emerged from the reef during the day (98 %) had not fed, in contrast to those sampled at night (71%). Of the gnathiids with no engorged gut, most (97 %) of those collected during the day were small (II. mm) compared to those collected at night (19%), the latter being mostly >1 mm. Of the gnathiids with an engorged gut, most were sampled at night (83 %) and 97 % were >1 mm in size. These percentages suggest differences in the emergence behaviour among Life stages or species of gnathiids. This study, which shows that gnathiids do emerge during the day and supports other studies showing that gnathiids also attack fishes during the day, has important implications for understanding the role of cleaner fish and their main food source, gnathiids, as it shows there is a constant source of gnathiids emerging from the reef during the day and night in search of hosts.

Cleaning wrasse species vary with respect to dependency on the mutualism and behavioural adaptations in interactions

Interspecific mutualisms are an essential feature of life on earth, yet we know little about their evolution and stability. In many mutualisms several species are available as partners, raising questions about the similarity in function and behavioural repertoire depending on the partner species. Furthermore, variation between species in the quantity and quality of interactions resulting in variation in payoffs may allow us to infer the potential evolutionary origin of a multispecies mutualism complex. We addressed these issues in the marine cleaning mutualism, in which so-called 'cleaners' remove ectoparasites from so-called 'client' reef fish. We measured several parameters concerning the quantity and quality of cleaning interactions in six sympatric cleaner wrasse species. We found significant variation between cleaner species with respect to client diversity, the number of interactions with predatory clients, the duration of interactions, the frequency of client jolts as a correlate of 'cheating' by cleaners, and behaviours used for manipulation of client decisions. Exploratory correlations between cleaner species' dependency and our variables of interest suggest that cleaning originated as a conflict-free by-product mutualism and evolved towards more sophisticated behaviours, including strategic behaviours for interactions with predators, cheating and manipulation specifically adapted to the client type.

Cleaner wrasse prefer client mucus: support for partner control mechanisms in cleaning interactions

Recent studies on cleaning behaviour suggest that there are conflicts between cleaners and their clients over what cleaners eat. The diet of cleaners usually contains ectoparasites and some client tissue. It is unclear, however, whether cleaners prefer client tissue over ectoparasites or whether they include client tissue in their diet only when searching for parasites alone is not profitable. To distinguish between these two hypotheses, we trained cleaner fish Labroides dimidiatus to feed from plates and offered them client mucus from the parrotfish Chlorurus sordidus, parasitic monogenean flat-worms, parasitic gnathiid isopods and boiled flour glue as a control. We found that cleaners ate more mucus and monogeneans than gnathiids, with gnathiids eaten slightly more often than the control substance. Because gnathiids are the most abundant ectoparasites, our results suggest a potential for conflict between cleaners and clients over what the cleaner should eat, and support studies emphasizing the importance of partner control in keeping cleaning interactions mutualistic.

Labroidaes dimidiatus (Valenciennes, 1839)

Labroides dimidiatus, is one of several species of cleaner wrasses found on coral reefs from Eastern Africa and the Red Sea to French Polynesia, for the first time from Iran (Persian Gulf, Kish Island). Like other cleaner wrasses, it eats parasites and dead tissue off larger fishes’ skin in a mutualistic relationship that provides food and protection for the wrasse, and considerable health benefits for the other fishes. Some fish mimic cleaner wrasses. For example, a species of blenny called Aspidontus taeniatus has evolved the same behavior to tear small pieces of flesh from bigger fish. Cleaner wrasses are usually found at cleaning stations. Cleaning stations are occupied by different units of cleaner wrasses, such as a group of youths, a pair of adults, or a group of females accompanied by a dominant male. When visitors come near the cleaning stations, the cleaner wrasses greet the visitors by performing a dance-like motion in which they move their rear up and down. The visitors are referred to as "clients". Blue streak cleaner wrasses clean to consume ectoparasites on client fish for food. The bigger fish recognise them as cleaner fish because they have a lateral stripe along the length of their bodies and by their movement patterns.

Optimising cleaning behaviour: minimising the costs and maximising ectoparasite removal

Little is known of how client fish minimise the costs of cleaning behaviour while maximising ectoparasite removal by cleaner fish. Previous studies have found that abundance on fish and infestation behaviour of gnathiid isopods, the main parasite eaten by cleaner fish, varies diurnally. We examined whether reduced foraging is a cost of cleaning behaviour in clients and whether the behaviour of the client fish, the thick-lipped wrasse Hemigymnus melapterus, towards the cleaner fish Labroides dimidiatus varied diurnally to maximise ectoparasite removal, possibly in response to the diurnal changes in the abundance and infestation patterns of gnathiids. We found that during the midday and afternoon, client foraging rates were negatively related to the duration and frequency of inspections, suggesting that cleaning may, at some times of the day, be energetically costly to the client in terms of reduced foraging opportunities. Surprisingly, we found that the duration and frequency of inspections of clients by cleaners did not vary among diel time periods. A model of gnathiid dynamics on individual fish is proposed. It shows that the observed diurnal pattern in gnathiid abundance on fish can be generated with the constant duration and frequency of inspections that was observed in this study. Thus clients would not have more gnathiids removed by modifying their cleaning behaviour.