Individuals within groups of cooperatively breeding species may partition reproduction, with the dominant pair often taking the largest share. The dominant's ability to reproductively control subordinates may depend on differences in competitive ability, due to, e.g. body size differences, but may also depend on the number of same-sex competitors inside the group. We tested experimentally whether subordinates reproduce more when these subordinates are large or when a second subordinate of the same sex need to be controlled by the dominants, using the cooperatively breeding cichlid Neolamprologus pulcher. Dominant pairs were assisted by a large and a small unrelated subordinate; sexes of these fish were varied in a full-factorial design (giving four treatments). Dominant males lost significantly more parentage to the large subordinate male when a small subordinate male was also present, compared to when a small subordinate female was present. However, subordinate paternity was generally low and did not significantly curb total dominant male reproductive output, which was more affected by the sizes and numbers of reproductive females present inside his group. Dominant female maternity, clutch sizes and total output did not depend on the treatments. Subordinate-subordinate reproduction was virtually absent (one out of 874 offspring). Female subordinates were more likely to provide care for their own broods. In contrast, male subordinates did not adjust their level of care to their parentage. Variability in female subordinate alloparental brood care was particularly high, with females showing more care than males in general. We also detected effects of growth rate and food ration on parentage independent of the treatments, most notably: (i) a trade-off between dominant male growth rate and paternity; (ii) a decrease in dominant male paternity with increasing food ration; (iii) a positive effect of growth rate on paternity in small males. We conclude that dominant males should be sensitive to the number and sizes of subordinate males present in their group, particularly when these subordinates are not helpful or grow fast, and food is plentiful. Dominant females should be less sensitive, because female subordinates do not appear to impose reproductive costs and can be helpful through alloparental brood care.

BackgroundIn many cooperatively breeding vertebrates, subordinates assist a dominant pair to raise the dominants' offspring. Previously, it has been suggested that subordinates may help in payment for continued residency on the territory (the ‘pay-to-stay hypothesis’), but payment might also be reciprocated or might allow subordinates access to reproductive opportunities.Methodology/Principal FindingsWe measured dominant and subordinate female alloparental brood care and reproductive success in four separate experiments and show that unrelated female dominant and subordinate cichlid fish care for each other's broods (alloparental brood care), but that there is no evidence for reciprocal ‘altruism’ (no correlation between alloparental care received and given). Instead, subordinate females appear to pay with alloparental care for own direct reproduction.Conclusions/SignificanceOur results suggest subordinate females pay with alloparental care to ensure access to the breeding substrate and thereby increase their opportunities to lay their own clutches. Subordinates' eggs are laid, on average, five days after the dominant female has produced her first brood. We suggest that immediate reproductive benefits need to be considered in tests of the pay-to-stay hypothesis.

In cooperatively-breeding species, the sexes of subordinate group members may have important consequences for dominant individuals. We varied subordinates' sexes in aquariumhoused groups of the cooperatively-breeding cichlid fish Neolamprologus pulcher, and compared the behaviours of dominant individuals in groups with same-versus oppositesex subordinates. Dominants tended to be more aggressive towards same-sex subordinates, and dominant males directed more affiliative behaviour towards large female subordinates. These patterns suggest that mixed-sex groups can be viewed as separate male and female dominance hierarchies. Aggressive and affiliative interactions between dominant males and dominant females were more frequent when a large subordinate was female, which indicates that subordinates can be a source of conflict between the members of a breeding pair. Finally, subordinates' sexes affected dominants' locations within aquaria and the performance of territory maintenance behaviour by dominant females. In many cases, the effect of one subordinate's sex depended on a second subordinate's sex or on group members' absolute or relative body sizes. Therefore, predicting effects of subordinates' sexes in larger, more variable groups will be challenging. Our results are the first to experimentally demonstrate the importance of a group's gender composition for the behaviour of dominant individuals in a cooperatively-breeding species.

In group‐living species, a dominant male’s ability to monopolize reproduction, and the cost of doing so, are expected to vary with a group’s gender composition. We used spawning observations of a group‐living cichlid, Neolamprologus pulcher, to test this expectation. We constructed groups that contained a dominant breeding pair and either two male subordinates, one male and one female subordinate or two female subordinates. Parasitic spawning by male subordinates was more common in groups with two male subordinates than in groups with one male and one female subordinate. Female subordinates were never observed laying eggs in dominant females’ clutches, but three female subordinates laid independent clutches. During spawning, frequencies of dominant male aggression towards male and female subordinates were similar. Dominant males were less aggressive during non‐reproductive periods. The declines were greater for female subordinates, such that, during non‐reproductive periods, dominant males were more aggressive towards male subordinates. Aggression towards each subordinate was also affected by the second subordinate’s gender; the direction of that effect differed for large and small subordinates. Male subordinates approached breeding shelters less often than female subordinates, and both male and female subordinates approached shelters more frequently when the second subordinate was male. Collectively, these patterns suggest: (1) that male subordinates impose higher costs on dominant males than female subordinates do and (2) that the presence of a second male subordinate imposes additional costs beyond those of the first male subordinate. We discuss the implications of these effects for dominant and subordinate group members.