Can outcomes of dyadic interactions be consistent across contexts among wild zebrafish?

Abstract

Winner–loser relations among group-living individuals are often measured by the levels of aggressive interactions between them. These interactions are typically driven by competition for resources such as food and mates. It has been observed in recent studies on zebrafish that dominant males generally have higher total reproductive success than their less aggressive subordinate counterparts. This study aimed to test whether males who monopolized a food resource (winners) also displayed higher levels of aggression than the males who were unsuccessful (losers). Further, the study also tested whether the same ‘winner’ males were also able to monopolize interactions with females during courtship. The results from these experiments showed that while males monopolizing food resources (winners) demonstrated higher levels of agonistic interactions than the losers, the average number of courtship interactions initiated by either of the males (i.e. winners/losers) with a female was not significantly different. A significant relationship was obtained between the number of aggressive interactions and feeding latencies of males in the context of food monopolization. This indicated that there could be a linkage between boldness defined by feeding latency in a novel environment and agonistic responses. The probable role of nature of resources, resource availability and distribution in determining the outcomes of dyadic contests is discussed.