Assortative preferences for stripes in danios

Decisions about joining social groups are often contingent on one’s own phenotypic characteristics and those of existing group members. Zebrafish and their allies (genus Danio) vary substantially in the expression of conspicuous lateral stripes. We presented wild-type zebrafish (D. rerio), two artificially selected D. rerio strains with reduced stripe expression, as well as the stripeless D. albolineatus and the striped D. nigrofasciatus, with simultaneous choices between synthetic, computer-animated shoals of stripeless and striped Danio. Each species and strain of Danio preferred the phenotype that most resembled its own, with a strong preference for striped stimuli by fish with dark-stripe phenotypes, and a strong preference for no stripes by fish lacking stripes. Stripes are therefore a key shoaling cue in Danio. Individuals appear to acquire a general preference for stripes, or no stripes, as a consequence of experience with a specific stripe phenotype.

[1]  I. Barber,et al.  How strong are familiarity preferences in shoaling fish? , 2001, Animal Behaviour.

[2]  E R Turnell,et al.  Mate choice in zebrafish (Danio rerio) analyzed with video-stimulus techniques. , 2003, The Biological bulletin.

[3]  W. Moody,et al.  Evidence for a peripheral olfactory memory in imprinted salmon. , 1994, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[4]  W. Rainboth.  Inland fishes of India and adjacent countries , 1994, Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries.

[5]  C. Carlson,et al.  Effect of cross-rearing on species identification in zebra fish and pearl danios. , 1982, Developmental psychobiology.

[6]  J. Krause,et al.  The social organization of fish shoals: a test of the predictive power of laboratory experiments for the field , 2000, Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

[7]  G. G. Rosenthal,et al.  Design considerations and techniques for constructing video stimuli , 2000, acta ethologica.

[8]  Ian K Quigley,et al.  Pigment pattern formation in zebrafish: A model for developmental genetics and the evolution of form , 2002, Microscopy research and technique.

[9]  Stephen L. Johnson,et al.  Zebrafish hybrids suggest genetic mechanisms for pigment pattern diversification in Danio , 2001, Development Genes and Evolution.

[10]  N. Metcalfe,et al.  Fish recognize and prefer to shoal with poor competitors , 1995, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[11]  Jens Krause,et al.  Shoal choice in zebrafish, Danio rerio: the influence of shoal size and activity , 2001, Animal Behaviour.

[12]  J. Godin,et al.  Context-dependent group size choice in fish , 2004, Animal Behaviour.

[13]  G. Rosenthal,et al.  Shoal Choice in Swordtails when Preferences Conflict , 2005 .

[14]  S. McRobert,et al.  The influence of body coloration on shoaling preferences in fish , 1998, Animal Behaviour.

[15]  N. Peuhkuri,et al.  Size-assortative shoaling in fish: the effect of oddity on foraging behaviour , 1997, Animal Behaviour.

[16]  D. Chivers,et al.  Familiarity and shoal cohesion in fathead minnows (Pimephales promelas): implications for antipredator behaviour , 1995 .

[17]  T. Pitcher.  Functions of Shoaling Behaviour in Teleosts , 1986 .

[18]  T. Pitcher.  Behaviour of Teleost Fishes , 1986 .

[19]  M. Ryan,et al.  Learned Social Preference in Zebrafish , 2004, Current Biology.

[20]  V. Braithwaite,et al.  Parasitism, oddity and the mechanism of shoal choice , 1998 .

[21]  J. Krause,et al.  Mixed-species shoaling in fish: the sensory mechanisms and costs of shoal choice , 2002, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[22]  C. Mary,et al.  When should males lek? Insights from a dynamic state variable model , 2003 .

[23]  Martin Giurfa,et al.  Local-feature assembling in visual pattern recognition and generalization in honeybees , 2004, Nature.

[24]  J. Terborgh,et al.  Oddity and the ‘confusion effect’ in predation , 1986, Animal Behaviour.