Correlates of group size in a cooperatively breeding cichlid fish (Neolamprologus pulcher)

By S. Balshine, B. Leach, F. Neat, Hannah Reid, M. Taborsky, Noam Y. Werner. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 2001

262 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/8b4effd13600ccc5ade87b67f367d0d3c99b29d1

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Network structure is related to social conflict in a cooperatively breeding fish (2013, background): “While captivity will always constrain animals in their ability to move throughout their environment (Estévez & Christman 2006), the aquaria used in this study were a similar size to the median territory size reported for wild N. pulcher (Balshine et al. 2001).”
Social experience in early ontogeny has lasting effects on social skills in cooperatively breeding cichlids (2010, unknown): “Six males and six females above 60 mm standard length (SL) haphazardly chosen from stock tanks were assigned to form six breeding pairs conditional on males being larger than females to mimic natural size relations (see Taborsky 1984; Balshine et al. 2001).”
Large group size yields group stability in the cooperatively breeding cichlid Neolamprologus pulcher (2005, methodology): “Groups create a breeding shelter (where eggs are laid on the stone ceiling) and hiding shelters for all group members (where the fish hide from predator attacks, Balshine et al., 2001; Werner et al., 2003).”
Context-dependent impacts of anthropogenic noise on individual and social behaviour in a cooperatively breeding fish (2013, background): “They are found in groups consisting of a dominant pair with up to 14 subordinates of different sizes and sex (Balshine et al. 2001; Heg et al. 2005).”
Experimental manipulation of helping in a cooperative breeder: helpers ‘pay to stay’ by pre-emptive appeasement (2005, background): “Several studies have shown that helpers gain direct fitness benefits from staying in a group’s territory, such as protection (Taborsky 1984; Balshine et al. 2001; R. Bergmüller, D. Heg & M. Taborsky, unpublished data), the opportunity to participate in reproduction (Dierkes et al. 1999) and the…”
Sex differences in rates of territory joining and inheritance in a cooperatively breeding cichlid fish (2006, methodology): “Second, male N. pulcher grow larger than females (Balshine et al. 2001); this larger body size may lower the cost of dispersing by reducing predation risk (Paine 1976).”
Mothers adjust egg size to helper number in a cooperatively breeding cichlid (2007, methodology): “…pulcher lives in social groups consisting of a breeding pair and up to 36 subordinates, including typically 1–9 brood care helpers (see Figure 1 in Balshine et al. 2001) which participate in all parental duties including the defense of young from predators (Taborsky and Limberger 1981; Taborsky…”
A test of the ‘challenge hypothesis’ in cichlid fish: simulated partner and territory intruder experiments (2004, unknown): “pulcher, which lives in large groups with helpers of both sexes and different sizes (Taborsky & Limberger 1981; Balshine-Earn et al. 2001), and the polygynous and biparental snail-shell-breeding L.”
Mirror, mirror on the wall: the predictive value of mirror tests for measuring aggression in fish (2014, background): “2005, 2008), each consisting of breeding groups of different sizes (2–25 individuals/group, Taborsky and Limberger 1981; Balshine et al. 2001; Heg et al. 2005).”
Rules of engagement for resource contests in a social fish (2011, background): “Predation pressure in N. pulcher’s natural environment is severe (Balshine et al. 2001; Heg et al. 2004), and access to a well-protected shelter is essential for reproduction and survival (Balshine et al. 2001; Heg et al. 2004).”
Experimental evidence for helper effects in a cooperatively breeding cichlid (2005, background): “This colony consisted of a cluster of .100 groups (average group size: 6.5, range ¼ 3‐18, including all individuals larger than 19.5 mm SL; see also Balshine et al., 2001 ) at a depth of 9‐11 m, approximately 200 m from the shore.”
Dispersal patterns and status change in a co‐operatively breeding cichlid Neolamprologus pulcher: evidence from microsatellite analyses and behavioural observations (2004, methodology): “Recapture and dispersal data were obtained as a result of a series of behavioural experiments performed over a period of 2 years (Balshine-Earn et al., 1998; Balshine et al., 2001; Werner et al., 2003).”
Effects of isotocin on social responses in a cooperatively breeding fish (2012, background): “Neolamprologus pulcher is a small freshwater fish endemic to Lake Tanganyika, Africa, that forms permanent social groups containing a single dominant breeding pair and several (1e20) adult subordinate helpers (Taborsky & Limberger 1981; Balshine-Earn et al. 1998; Balshine et al. 2001; Heg et al. 200”
Extended safe havens and between-group dispersal of helpers in a cooperatively breeding cichlid (2005, background): “The number of rocks has previously been found to affect the number of group members a territory can harbour by an experimental rock-removal experiment (Balshine et al., 2001), as it influences the number of potential shelters available.”
Size-dependent task specialization in a cooperative cichlid in response to experimental variation of demand (2011, background): “pulcher in their movements, since the cages were sufficiently large to encompass the natural territory area and group members’ home ranges (median territory size 0.315 m2, range 0.078e1.010 m2; Balshine et al. 2001).”
Male and female cooperatively breeding fish provide support for the "Challenge Hypothesis" (2006, background): “…and parental behavior, in the field, males and females differ in the frequency or rate of these behaviors; females (both breeders and helpers) perform more defense behavior (Balshine et al., 2001; Stiver et al., 2005) and direct brood care (Taborsky and Grantner, 1998; Stiver et al., 2005).”
Size differences within a dominance hierarchy influence conflict and help in a cooperatively breeding cichlid (2005, background): “…is correlational, but is consistent with the results of other studies that showed that the presence of helpers reduced breeder workload (Balshine et al., 2001) and that, when focal helpers were prevented from defending, other groups members increased defence (Bergmüller & Taborsky,…”