Cookies Policy

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

Benthic, limnetic and oceanic threespine stickleback: profiles of reproductive behaviour

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this article

+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

image of Behaviour

Freshwater threespine stickleback fall along a benthic (bottom feeding)–limnetic (plankton feeding) continuum of ecotypes. Although trophic and courtship behaviour are well-described, the full reproductive cycle has not been characterized in the ecotypes. We provide detailed in situ descriptions of the reproductive cycle of males in one population of each ecotype, and a less detailed description in one oceanic population likely to represent the ancestral form that gave rise to the post-glacial freshwater radiation in southern British Columbia. All populations exhibited typical patterns including: pre-spawning nest building, fanning (which peaked in intensity just before hatching of embryos), and gluing (which was most common from nest building through the early parental phase). These elements of behaviour may be fixed by the physiological requirements of the fry. Males in the benthic and oceanic populations interacted frequently with groups and solitary non-neighbours, reflecting the abundance of bottom-feeding adults. Interactions with groups did not occur in limnetic populations and those with solitary non-neighbours were rare. Interactions were common with neighbours in all populations, but in the limnetic population they were conspicuous and ritualized, rather than the simple chases observed in the other populations. Males in the limnetic population also attended to the nest more, in some cases producing a 3-cm mound of sediment following the completion of spawning and often placing rushes around the pit-nest. The general pattern was one in which males in the cannibalistic benthic and oceanic populations appeared to be constrained in their interactions with neighbours and their attention to the nest by the need for vigilance and nest defense, while limnetic males attended more to nests and neighbours, possibly exhibiting the optimal pattern of nest-directed activities for the fry.

Affiliations: 1: Department of Biology, Clark University, 950 Main Street, Worcester, MA 01610-1477, USA; 2: Department of Biology, Clark University, 950 Main Street, Worcester, MA 01610-1477, USA; Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269-3043, USA


Full text loading...


Data & Media loading...

Article metrics loading...



Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Subscribe to ToC alert
  • Get permissions
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
    Behaviour — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation