Skip to main content
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences logoLink to Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
. 2003 Nov 7;270(1530):2271–2277. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2003.2510

Evolutionarily labile responses to a signal of aggressive intent.

Jason A Moretz 1, Molly R Morris 1
PMCID: PMC1691502  PMID: 14613614

Abstract

Males of many swordtail species possess vertical bar pigment patterns that are used both in courtship and agonistic interactions. Expression of the bars may function as a conventional threat signal during conflicts with rival males; bars intensify at the onset of aggression and fade in the subordinate male at contest's end. We used mirror image stimulation and bar manipulations to compare the aggressive responses of the males of four swordtail species to their barred and barless images. We found that having a response to the bars is tightly linked to having genes for bars, while the nature of the response the bars evoked varied across species. Specifically, we report the first known instance where closely related species exhibited differing and contradictory responses to a signal of aggressive motivation. Demonstrating that a signal conveys the same information across species (aggressive intent) while the response to that information has changed among species suggests that the nature of the responses are more evolutionarily labile than the signal.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (188.9 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Dawkins M. S. Are there general principles of signal design? Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1993 May 29;340(1292):251–255. doi: 10.1098/rstb.1993.0065. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Hurd PL. Cooperative signalling between opponents in fish fights. Anim Behav. 1997 Nov;54(5):1309–1315. doi: 10.1006/anbe.1997.0531. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Molles L. E., Vehrencamp S. L. Songbird cheaters pay a retaliation cost: evidence for auditory conventional signals. Proc Biol Sci. 2001 Oct 7;268(1480):2013–2019. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2001.1757. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Parker G. A. Assessment strategy and the evolution of fighting behaviour. J Theor Biol. 1974 Sep;47(1):223–243. doi: 10.1016/0022-5193(74)90111-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Quinn V. S., Hews D. K. Signals and behavioural responses are not coupled in males: aggression affected by replacement of an evolutionarily lost colour signal. Proc Biol Sci. 2000 Apr 22;267(1445):755–758. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2000.1067. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Ryan MJ, Rand AS. Evoked vocal response in male túngara frogs: pre-existing biases in male responses? Anim Behav. 1998 Dec;56(6):1509–1516. doi: 10.1006/anbe.1998.0928. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences are provided here courtesy of The Royal Society

RESOURCES