1991
DOI: 10.1080/08927014.1991.9525388
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Filial cannibalism in sticklebacks: a reproductive management strategy?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

6
21
3
1

Year Published

1996
1996
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 54 publications
(31 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
6
21
3
1
Order By: Relevance
“…All parental males examined in this study had food in their stomachs, and while they benefited from a diet supplement, they also appeared to have access to food within their territory and appeared able to maintain themselves in good enough condition to complete a breeding cycle. The lack of a clear relationship between filial cannibalism and nutritional status has been found in other fishes (Lavery & Keenleyside 1990;Belles-Isles & Fitzgerald 1991;Kvarnemo 1997;Lindström & Sargent 1997;Vinyoles et al 1999). Males in our study that were monitored for a further 14 days after supplemental feeding stopped also showed no difference in rates of filial cannibalism, further indicating that cannibalism was not strongly related to diet.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 47%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…All parental males examined in this study had food in their stomachs, and while they benefited from a diet supplement, they also appeared to have access to food within their territory and appeared able to maintain themselves in good enough condition to complete a breeding cycle. The lack of a clear relationship between filial cannibalism and nutritional status has been found in other fishes (Lavery & Keenleyside 1990;Belles-Isles & Fitzgerald 1991;Kvarnemo 1997;Lindström & Sargent 1997;Vinyoles et al 1999). Males in our study that were monitored for a further 14 days after supplemental feeding stopped also showed no difference in rates of filial cannibalism, further indicating that cannibalism was not strongly related to diet.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 47%
“…Hoelzer 1988;Belles-Isles & Fitzgerald 1991;DeWoody et al 2001). Predation did not appear to be the primary cause of embryo losses within a clutch.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Consistent with the energy-based hypothesis, supplementary feeding parental males reduced filial cannibalism in the common goby (Pomatoschitus microps; Kvarnemo et al 1998), the scissortail sergeant (Abudefduf sexfasciatus; Manica 2004), and the Cortez damselfish (Stegastes rectifraenum; Hoelzer 1992), and in some cases (e.g., Manica 2004) males did appear to simply be cleaning the nest of dead eggs (i.e., mortality resulting from filial cannibalism is similar to background mortality) when food is abundant. Contrary to predictions of the energy-based hypothesis, there was no relationship found between cannibalism and food availability and/ or male condition in fantail darters (Etheostoma flabellare; Lindströ m and Sargent 1997) and the three-spined stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus; Belles-Isles and Fitzgerald 1991). Furthermore, male flagfish (Jordanella floridae) with reduced food availability actually consumed fewer eggs than males with high food availability (Klug and St. Mary 2005).…”
contrasting
confidence: 41%
“…They may parasitize the production of females by consuming their zygotes to offset the cost of parental care, thereby remaining in good physical condition for re-mating (Rohwer 1978). Some studies have suggested that deterioration of physical condition in brooding males is the primary factor in the incidence of filial cannibalism (Rohwer 1978, DeMartini 1987, Marconato & Bisazza 1988, Petersen & Marchetti 1989, Petersen 1990, Belles-Isles & FitzGerald 1991. However, few studies have examined parental physical condition quantitatively in connection with filial cannibalism.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 96%