FISH who have a number of partners during mating may still be able to colonise if they curtail their rampant sexual habits, a new study has found.
Researchers at St Andrews University have made the surprise discovery that restricting a normally multiply mating fish to monogamy does not impair their colonisation ability.
The findings show releasing just one or two fish into the wild may be enough to trigger an aquatic invasion.
They tested whether forcing female guppies to be monogamous would impede their ability to establish viable populations.
The guppy (Poecilia reticulata) is a successful invasive species throughout the tropics. In the wild it employs a 'multiple mating' strategy, and resulting broods commonly contain offspring sired by up to five different fathers.
Previous studies have shown that mating with multiple partners carries a range of benefits, including increased genetic and phenotypic diversity of offspring, and inbreeding avoidance -which are potentially advantageous for a species attempting to colonise a new environment.
The latest paper found female guppies were either allowed to mate with four males, or were restricted to one partner. Pregnant females were then left to establish populations in large tanks in the laboratory. After one year, the two treatments were compared.
Dr Amy Deacon, one of the researchers, said: "One of our key findings was that mating history did not predict establishment success, which was 88 per cent in both treatments".
The researchers had expected that inbreeding depression might be evident in the behaviour of fish in the monogamous treatment, which would suggest that their ability to persist once established could be limited. However, newborn and adult male offspring of both treatments were equally good at avoiding predators and at courting females.
The research paper is published in the journal BMC Ecology.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article