Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Accepted manuscripts
    • Issue in progress
    • Latest complete issue
    • Issue archive
    • Archive by article type
    • Special issues
    • Subject collections
    • Interviews
    • Alerts
  • About us
    • About JEB
    • Editors and Board
    • Editor biographies
    • Travelling Fellowships
    • Grants and funding
    • Workshops and Meetings
    • The Company of Biologists
    • Journal news
  • For authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Aims and scope
    • Presubmission enquiries
    • Article types
    • Manuscript preparation
    • Cover suggestions
    • Editorial process
    • Promoting your paper
    • Open Access
    • Outstanding paper prize
    • Biology Open transfer
  • Journal info
    • Journal policies
    • Rights and permissions
    • Media policies
    • Reviewer guide
    • Alerts
  • Contacts
    • Contact JEB
    • Subscriptions
    • Advertising
    • Feedback
  • COB
    • About The Company of Biologists
    • Development
    • Journal of Cell Science
    • Journal of Experimental Biology
    • Disease Models & Mechanisms
    • Biology Open

User menu

  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Experimental Biology
  • COB
    • About The Company of Biologists
    • Development
    • Journal of Cell Science
    • Journal of Experimental Biology
    • Disease Models & Mechanisms
    • Biology Open

supporting biologistsinspiring biology

Journal of Experimental Biology

  • Log in
Advanced search

RSS  Twitter  Facebook  YouTube  

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Accepted manuscripts
    • Issue in progress
    • Latest complete issue
    • Issue archive
    • Archive by article type
    • Special issues
    • Subject collections
    • Interviews
    • Alerts
  • About us
    • About JEB
    • Editors and Board
    • Editor biographies
    • Travelling Fellowships
    • Grants and funding
    • Workshops and Meetings
    • The Company of Biologists
    • Journal news
  • For authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Aims and scope
    • Presubmission enquiries
    • Article types
    • Manuscript preparation
    • Cover suggestions
    • Editorial process
    • Promoting your paper
    • Open Access
    • Outstanding paper prize
    • Biology Open transfer
  • Journal info
    • Journal policies
    • Rights and permissions
    • Media policies
    • Reviewer guide
    • Alerts
  • Contacts
    • Contact JEB
    • Subscriptions
    • Advertising
    • Feedback
Correspondence
Comment on ‘Biparental mucus feeding: a unique example of parental care in an Amazonian cichlid’
Robert I. Holbrook
Journal of Experimental Biology 2011 214: 1213-1214; doi: 10.1242/jeb.053652
Robert I. Holbrook
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Buckley and colleagues (Buckley et al., 2010) describe parental care in discus cichlids of the genus Symphysodon, demonstrate that immunoglobulin is present in the mucus secreted by breeding discus, and propose that discus might be an interesting novel model system for studies of mammal-like parental care.

Hildemann (Hildemann, 1959) appears to have been the first to describe parental care in discus, providing detailed analyses of the behaviours re-visited by Buckley and colleagues (Buckley et al., 2010). Parental investment is provided after fertilization of the eggs not just in discus but in all cichlids (ca. 1600 species), and many other families of fish (for reviews, see Blumer, 1979; Breder and Rosen, 1966; Gross and Sargent, 1985). In fact, parental care is exhibited in around 22% of teleost fish, and in 72% of non-teleost fish (Sargent and Gross, 1993). Sargent and Gross also review the literature and the proposed models that investigate the cost of reproduction and the parent–offspring conflict within fish (Sargent and Gross, 1993), citing early examples, just after the publication of Robert Trivers' theory (Carlisle, 1982; Presley, 1976; Trivers, 1974).

In most fish parental care involves fry guarding or provisioning; for example, breeding convict cichlids (species name) actively disturb the substrate using their pectoral fins to release micro-organisms for their fry to feed on, even though the parents themselves do not feed on such small prey items (Keenleyside, 1981; Krischik and Weber, 1975; Williams, 1972).

The highly developed bi-parental care and fry mucus-feeding behaviour observed in Symphysodon spp. is also widespread – at least 28 species have been reported to exhibit fry mucus-feeding behaviour in four families (Noakes, 1979), and this behaviour has evolved many times, in species separated on distant branches of the fish phylogeny, including the Osteoglossiforme Arapaima gigas (Liiling, 1964; Menezes, 1951).

Fry feeding on the mucus secreted onto the skin of their parents is called ‘contacting’ and has been studied in detail in Midas cichlids (Amphilophus citrinellus), orange chromides (Etroplus maculatus) and discus (Symphysodon spp.), in both the laboratory and the wild (Noakes, 1973; Noakes and Barlow, 1973; Ward and Barlow, 1967). The results of Buckley and colleagues (Buckley et al., 2010) on the role of the parents in this behaviour confirm earlier work on the Midas cichlid (A. citrinellus) (Schütz and Barlow, 1997).

Whilst it has been well documented that the fry of Symphysodon spp. are feeding on the mucus secreted by their parents (Chong et al., 2005; Noakes, 1979; Perrone and Zaret, 1979) [see also Hildemann (Hildemann, 1959) and references therein], it has also been shown that, in contrast to mammals, mucus is not the only meal they are getting. Critically, Bremer and Walter (Bremer and Walter, 1986) found that there are more secretocytes undergoing mitosis in breeding individuals of S. discus than in non-breeders and analysis of the faeces of the contacting fry showed that they were consuming these cells and other micro-organisms that are present on the skin of the adults.

However, one area in which the analogy may break down is in Buckley and colleagues' description of weaning (Buckley et al., 2010). The time at which the ‘weaning’ behaviour is proposed to occur coincides with the time when juvenile fish in the wild would naturally disperse from their parents. At this point in the breeding cycle, parental care has finished in the wild for most cichlids, including those that exhibit contacting behaviour (Noakes and Barlow, 1973). In fact, under aquarium conditions, if Midas cichlid (A. citrinellus) fry are left with their parents they eat from them so vigorously in the fourth week that they create wounds on the parental skin (Barlow, 2000). In the wild, such a situation would never occur, as dispersal would have already separated the young fish from their parents (Barlow, 2000).

The most interesting result reported by Buckley and colleagues (Buckley et al., 2010) is that immunoglobulin concentrations are higher in breeding discus than non-breeding discus, and are highest in wild breeding individuals. This result is fascinating and opens up opportunities for future research. What we need to know now is whether this immunoglobulin is passed on to the contacting fry in the same concentrations as it is found in the mucus. If it is, how does the increased amount of immunoglobulin affect the growth and survival of these fry? Away from the immunoglobulin result, there remain other interesting questions for contacting behaviour. The secretocytes found on discus by Bremer and Walter (Bremer and Walter, 1986) appear to be specialized cells; are these types of cell present in other fish that are known to have contacting fry?

The case of parental care in fish is indeed a fascinating model system for answering a variety of questions about the cost of reproduction, and the parent–offspring conflict, and many investigations have already been conducted. It is my hope that modern technologies and techniques can help us to better understand these systems and their problems.

Acknowledgments

I thank Justine Aw and Adrian Thomas for helpful comments on the manuscript, and Andrea Flack for helping me understand the Bremer and Walter (Bremer and Walter, 1986) paper, which is written in German. I would also like to thank the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council for funding (BB/H01103X/1).

  • © 2011.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Barlow, G. W.
    (2000). The Cichlid Fishes. New York: Basic Books.
  2. ↵
    1. Blumer, L. S.
    (1979). Male parental care in the bony fishes. Q. Rev. Biol. 54, 149-161.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  3. ↵
    1. Breder, C. M. and
    2. Rosen, D. E.
    (1966). Modes of Reproduction in Fishes. Garden City, NY: Natural History Press.
  4. ↵
    1. Bremer, H. and
    2. Walter, U.
    (1986). Histologisehe, ultrastrukturelle und topoehemisehe Untersuchungen zur Brutpflege von Symphysodon aequifasciatus Pellegrin 1903. Gegenbaurs morph. Jahrb. Leipzig 132, 183-194.
    OpenUrl
  5. ↵
    1. Buckley, J.,
    2. Maunder, R. J.,
    3. Foey, A.,
    4. Pearce, J.,
    5. Val, A. L. and
    6. Sloman, K.
    (2010). Biparental mucus feeding: a unique example of parental care in an Amazonian cichlid. J. Exp. Biol. 213, 3787-3795.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. ↵
    1. Carlisle, T. R.
    (1982). Brood success in variable environments – implications for parental care allocation. Anim. Behav. 30, 824-836.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  7. ↵
    1. Chong, K.,
    2. Ying, T. S.,
    3. Foo, J.,
    4. Jin, L. T. and
    5. Chong, A.
    (2005). Characterisation of proteins in epidermal mucus of discus fish (Symphysodon spp.) during parental phase. Aquaculture 249, 469-476.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  8. ↵
    1. Gross, M. R. and
    2. Sargent, R. C.
    (1985). The evolution of male and female parental care in fishes. Am. Zool. 25, 807-822.
    OpenUrlWeb of Science
  9. ↵
    1. Hildemann, W. H.
    (1959). A cichlid fish Symphysodon discus, with unique nurture habits. Am. Zool. 93, 27-34.
    OpenUrl
  10. ↵
    1. Keenleyside, M. H. A.
    (1981). Parental care patterns of fishes. Am. Nat. 117, 1019-1022.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  11. ↵
    1. Krischik, V. A. and
    2. Weber, P. G.
    (1975). Induced parental care in male convict cichlid fish. Dev. Psychobiol. 8, 1-11.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    1. Liiling, K. H.
    (1964). Zur Biologie und Okologie von Arapaima gigas (Pisces, Osteoglossidae). Z. Morphol. Okol. Tiere 54, 436-530.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  13. ↵
    1. Menezes, R. S. D.
    (1951). Notas biologicas e economicas sobre a pirarucu, Arapaima gigas (Cuvier) (Actinopterygii, Arapaimidae). Ministerio Agricult. Ser. Estud. Tecnol. 3, 7-152.
    OpenUrl
  14. ↵
    1. Noakes, D. L. G.
    (1973). Parental behavior and some histological features of scales in Cichlasoma citrinellum (Pisces, Cichlidae). Can. J. Zool. 51, 619-622.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  15. ↵
    1. Noakes, D. L. G.
    (1979). Parent-touching behavior by young fishes: incidence, function and causation. Environ. Biol. Fish. 4, 389-400.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  16. ↵
    1. Noakes, D. L. G. and
    2. Barlow, G. W.
    (1973). Ontogeny of parent-contacting in young Cichlasoma citrinellum (Pisces, Cichlidae). Behaviour 46, 221-255.
    OpenUrl
  17. ↵
    1. Perrone, M. and
    2. Zaret, T. M.
    (1979). Parental care patterns of fishes. Am. Nat. 113, 351-361.
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  18. ↵
    1. Presley, P. H.
    (1976). Parental investment in the threespined stickleback, Gasterosteus aculeatus. MSc thesis, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
  19. ↵
    1. Sargent, R. C. and
    2. Gross, J. B.
    (1993). William’s principle: an explanation of parental care in teleost fishes. In Behaviour of Teleost Fishes (ed. Pitcher, T. J.), pp. 333-357. London: Chapman & Hall.
  20. ↵
    1. Schütz, M. and
    2. Barlow, G. W.
    (1997). Young of the Midas cichlid get biologically active nonnutrients by eating mucus from the surface of their parents. Fish Physiol. Biochem. 16, 11-18.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  21. ↵
    1. Trivers, R. L.
    (1974). Parent–offspring conflict. Am. Zool. 14, 249-264.
    OpenUrlWeb of Science
  22. ↵
    1. Ward, J. A. and
    2. Barlow, G. W.
    (1967). The maturation and regulation of glancing off the parents by young orange chromides (Etroplus maculatus: Pisces-Cichlidae). Behaviour 29, 1-56.
    OpenUrl
  23. ↵
    1. Williams, N. J.
    (1972). On the ontogeny of behaviour of the cichlid fish Cichlasoma nigrofasciaturn (Gunther). PhD thesis, University of Groningen, Holland.
Previous ArticleNext Article
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

This Issue

 Download PDF

Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Journal of Experimental Biology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Comment on ‘Biparental mucus feeding: a unique example of parental care in an Amazonian cichlid’
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Journal of Experimental Biology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Journal of Experimental Biology web site.
Share
Comment on ‘Biparental mucus feeding: a unique example of parental care in an Amazonian cichlid’
Robert I. Holbrook
Journal of Experimental Biology 2011 214: 1213-1214; doi: 10.1242/jeb.053652
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Comment on ‘Biparental mucus feeding: a unique example of parental care in an Amazonian cichlid’
Robert I. Holbrook
Journal of Experimental Biology 2011 214: 1213-1214; doi: 10.1242/jeb.053652

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Alerts

Please log in to add an alert for this article.

Sign in to email alerts with your email address

Article navigation

  • Top
  • Article
    • Acknowledgments
    • References
  • Info & metrics
  • PDF

Related articles

Cited by...

More in this TOC section

  • Oxygen- and capacity-limited thermal tolerance: blurring ecology and physiology
  • Connecting to ecology: a challenge for comparative physiologists? Response to ‘Oxygen- and capacity-limited thermal tolerance: blurring ecology and physiology’
  • Response to “The importance of controlling genetic variation – remarks on ‘Appropriate rearing density in domesticated zebrafish to avoid masculinization: links with the stress response’”
Show more Correspondence

Similar articles

Other journals from The Company of Biologists

Development

Journal of Cell Science

Disease Models & Mechanisms

Biology Open

Advertisement

Editors’ choice – Breath-holding locusts don't keep spiracles open when they exhale


Photo credit: Stav Talal.
Diapausing butterfly larvae keep their spiracles open while exhaling during discontinuous gas exchange; however, a recent study from Stav Talal and co-workers reveals that adult locusts do not. Instead they repeatedly open and close their spiracles in time with contractions of the abdominal muscle to expel air from the body.


JEB in the news – Sheep hair curl secret in cells


Photo credit: Anita Grosvenor.
Why does hair curl? By looking at curly merino sheep wool, scientists from New Zealand and Japan have discovered that the hair cells lining the outside of the curl are long (orthocortical cells) while the cells on the inside of the curl are another type (paracortical cells), which are short, making the hair bend to give it a curl. This JEB Research Article was reported in the New York Times and ABC news.


Commentary – Robotics-inspired biology

Robotic devices are increasingly generating ideas for experiments on living animals. Nick Gravish and George V. Lauder explore this new twist on the inspiration that biologists have traditionally taken from mechanical systems.


JEB symposium 2017 – The biology of fat

Delegates at the 2017 Journal of Experimental Biology symposium ‘The biology of fat’ share their experiences and highlights of the meeting. We have also recently published a special issue featuring review articles based on the talks at this meeting.

Articles

  • Accepted manuscripts
  • Issue in progress
  • Latest complete issue
  • Issue archive
  • Archive by article type
  • Special issues
  • Subject collections
  • Interviews
  • Alerts

About us

  • About JEB
  • Editors and Board
  • Editor biographies
  • Travelling Fellowships
  • Grants and funding
  • Workshops and Meetings
  • The Company of Biologists
  • Journal news

For Authors

  • Submit a manuscript
  • Aims and scope
  • Presubmission enquiries
  • Article types
  • Manuscript preparation
  • Cover suggestions
  • Editorial process
  • Promoting your paper
  • Open Access
  • Outstanding paper prize
  • Biology Open transfer

Journal Info

  • Journal policies
  • Rights and permissions
  • Media policies
  • Reviewer guide
  • Alerts

Contact

  • Contact JEB
  • Subscriptions
  • Advertising
  • Feedback

 Twitter   YouTube   LinkedIn

© 2018   The Company of Biologists Ltd   Registered Charity 277992