Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-03T15:09:07.618Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Nest Structure of the Corkwing Wrasse, Crenilabrus Melops (Labridae: Teleostei)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2009

Geoffrey W. Potts
Geoffrey W. Potts
Affiliation:
The Laboratory, Marine Biological Association, Citadel Hill, Plymouth PL1 2PB
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

There are five common species of wrasse (Labridae) in British coastal waters, two of which are hermaphrodite, (Labrus bergylta Ascanius and Labrus mixtus L.) and three are gonochorists with discrete sexes (Ctenolabrus rupestris) (L.), Centrolabrus exolelus (L.) and (Crenilabrus melops (L)) (Dipper & Pullin, 1979; Dipper, 1981). L. bergylta (Sjolander, Larson & Engstrom, 1972; Potts, personal observation) and L. mixtus (Wilson, 1958; Potts, 1984) lay their eggs in shallow depressions excavated in coarse paniculate substrates often closely associated with sublittoral reefs. Ctenolabrus rupestris, the smallest of the species is most usually associated with sublittoral crevices, and is the only one to produce pelagic eggs despite showing territorial aggression in the spawning season, a behaviour mostly confined to species with demersal eggs. Little is known about Centrolabrus exoletus, but from the striking sexual dichromism at maturity and its association with rocky reefs it may be supposed that it exhibits some form of parental care for the demersal eggs (Potts, 1984). Crenilabrus melops shows parental care of its eggs which are laid in large and complex algal nests, a feature which is common to all this genus (Fiedler, 1964; Quignard, 1966; Potts, 1984). The corkwing wrasse is one of the commonest coastal species which at maturity show sexual dimorphism and dichromism, a feature which led to taxonomic confusion among earlier workers and which is discussed by Potts (1974).

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 65 , Issue 2 , May 1985 , pp. 531 - 546
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baggerman, B., 1957. On the endocrine control of reproductive behaviour in the male three-spined stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus L.). Symposia of the Society for Experimental Biology, no. 20, 427–456.Google Scholar
Bayliss, J. R., 1981. The evolution of parental care in fishes, with reference to Darwin's rule of male sexual selection. Environmental Biology of Fishes, 6, 223–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Black, R., 1971. Hatching success in the three-spined stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus) in relation to changes in behaviour during the parental phase. Animal Behaviour, 19, 532–541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blumer, L. S., 1979. Male parental care in the bony fishes. Quarterly Review of Biology, 54, 149–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breder, C. M. Jr., & Rosen, D. E., 1966. Modes of Reproduction in Fishes, xv, 941 pp. New York: Natural History Press.Google Scholar
Bye, V. J., 1984. The role of environmental factors in timing of reproductive cycles. In Fish Reproduction - Strategies and Tactics (ed. Potts, G. W. and Wootton, R. J.), pp. 187–205. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Couch, J., 1862–5. A History of the Fishes of the British Isles, vol. 3, iv, 208 pp. London: Groombridge.Google Scholar
Courtenay, S. C. & Keenleyside, M. H. A., 1983. Nest site selection by the four-spine stickleback, Apeltes quadracus (Mitchill). Canadian Journal of Zoology, 61, 1443–1447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Danois, E. Le, 1949. Vie et Moeurs des Poissons. 335 pp. Paris: Payot.Google Scholar
Day, F., 1880–84. The Fishes of Great Britain and Ireland, vol. 1. 336 pp. London and Edinburgh: Williams and Norgate.Google Scholar
Dipper, F., 1981. The strange sex lives of British wrasse. New Scientist, 90, 444–445.Google Scholar
Dipper, F. A. & Pullin, R. S. V., 1979. Gonochorism and sex-inversion in British Labridae (Pisces). Journal of Zoology, 187, 97–112.Google Scholar
Fiedler, K. Von, 1964. Verhaltensstudien au Lippfischen der Gattung Crenilaburus (Labridae, Perciformes). Zeitschrift fur Tierpsychologie, 21, 521–591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerbe. Z., 1864. Observations sur la nidification des Crenilabres. Revue et Magasin de Zoologie Pure et Appliquee 16, 255–258.Google Scholar
Gibson, R. N., 1982. Recent studies on the biology of intertidal fishes. Oceanography and Marine Biology, an Annual Review, 20, 363–414.Google Scholar
Gross, M. R., 1984. Sunfish, salmon and the evolution of alternative reproductive strategies and tactics in fishes. In Fish Reproduction — Strategies and Tactics (ed. Potts, G. W. and Wootton, R. J.), pp. 55–75. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Guiton, P., 1960. On the control of behaviour during the reproductive cycle of Gasterosteus aculeatus. Behaviour, 15, 163–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinde, R. A., 1958. The nest-building behaviour of domesticated canaries. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London, 131, 1–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinde, R. A. & Steel, E. A., 1962. Selection of nest material by female canaries. Animal Behaviour, 10, 67–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinde, R. A. & Steel, E. A., 1966. Integration of the reproductive behaviour of female canaries. Symposia of the Society for Experimental Biology, no. 29, 401–426.Google ScholarPubMed
Jones, G. P., 1981. Spawning-site choice by female Pseudolabrus celidotus (Pisces: Labridae) and its influence on the mating system. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 8, 129–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keenleyside, M. H. A., 1972. Intraspecific intrusions into nests of spawning longear sunfish (Pisces: Centrarchidae). Copeia, 1972, 272–278.Google Scholar
Keenleyside, M. H. A., 1981. Parental care patterns of fishes. American Naturalist, 117, 1019–1022.Google Scholar
Lewis, J. R., 1964. The Ecology of Rocky Shores, xii, 323 pp. London: English Universities Press Ltd.Google Scholar
Littler, M. M. & Kauker, B. J., 1984. Heterotrichy and survival strategies in the red alga Corallina officinalis L. Botanica marina, 27, 37–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marliave, J. B., 1981. High intertidal spawning under rockweed, Fucus distichus, by the sharpnose sculpin Clinocottus acuticeps. Canadian Journal of Zoology, 59, 1122–1125.Google Scholar
Matthews, J. D., 1887. Note on ova, fry and nest of the ballan wrasse. Report of the Fishery Board for Scotland, 5, 245–247.Google Scholar
Parke, M. & Dixon, P. S., 1976. Check-list of British marine algae - third revision. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 56, 527—594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perrone, M. & Zaret, T. M., 1979. Parental care patterns of fishes. American Naturalist, 113, 351–361.Google Scholar
Potts, G. W., 1974. The colouration and its behavioural significance in the corkwing wrasse, Crenilabrus melops. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 54, 925–938.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Potts, G. W., 1984. Parental behaviour in temperate marine teleosts with special reference to the development of nest structures. In Fish Reproduction - Strategies and Tactics (ed. Potts, G. W. and Wootton, R. J.), pp. 223–244. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Quignard, J.-P., 1966. Recherches sur les Labridae (Poissons Téléostéens Perciformes) des cötes europeenes - systématique et biologic. Naturalia monspeliensa, 5, 1–248.Google Scholar
Quignard, J. P., 1967. L'oeuf et la larve du Labridé Symphodus (Crenilabrus) melops (Linné, 1758) influence de différents facteurs physicochimiques sur la durée du développement embryonnaire. Revue des travaux. Institut des pêches maritimes, 31, 355–358.Google Scholar
Ridley, M., 1978. Paternal care. Animal Behaviour, 26, 904–932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, M. R., 1977. Function of creek chub (Semotilus atromaculatus) nest-building. Ohio Journal of Science, 77, 36–37.Google Scholar
Ross, M. R., 1983. The frequency of nest construction and satellite male behaviour in the fallfish minnow. Environmental Biology of Fishes, 9, 65—70.Google Scholar
Russell, F. S., 1976. The Eggs and Planktonic Stages of British Marine Fishes, xv, 524 pp. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Sargent, R. C, 1982. Territory quality, male quality, courtship intrusions, and female nest-choice in the three-spine stickleback, Gasterosteus aculeatus. Animal Behaviour, 30, 364–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sjolander, S., Larson, H. O. & Engstrom, J., 1972. On the reproductive behaviour of two labrid fishes, the ballan wrasse (Labrus bergylta) and Jago's goldsinny (Ctenolabrus rupestris). Revue du Comportement Animal, 6, 43–51.Google Scholar
Soljan, T., 1930. Nestbau eines adriatischen Lippfisches (Crenilabrus ocelatus Forsk.). Zeitschrift für Morphologie und Ökologie der Tiere, 17, 145–153.Google Scholar
Wai, E. H. & Hoar, W. S., 1963. The secondary sex characters and reproductive behaviour of gonadectomised sticklebacks treated with methyl testosterone. Canadian Journal of Zoology, 41, 611–628.Google Scholar
Wilson, D. P., 1958. Notes from the Plymouth Aquarium. III. The sexual display of Labrus ossifagus (L.). Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 37, 299–307.Google Scholar
Winemiller, K. O. & Taylor, D. H., 1982. Smallmouth bass nesting behaviour and nest site selection in a small Ohio stream. Ohio Journal of Science, 82, 266–273.Google Scholar
Wootton, R. J., 1976. The Biology of the Sticklebacks, x, 387 pp. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar