Divergence in parental care, habitat selection and larval life history between two species of Peruvian poison frogs: an experimental analysis

Abstract

Changes in the nature of the ecological resources exploited by a species can lead to the evolution of novel suites of behaviours. We identified a case in which the transition from large pool use to the use of very small breeding pools in neotropical poison frogs (family Dendrobatidae) is associated with the evolution of a suite of behaviours, including biparental care (from uniparental care) and social monogamy (from promiscuity). We manipulated breeding pool size in order to demonstrate experimentally that breeding habitat selection strategy has evolved in concert with changes in parental care and mating system. We also manipulated intra‐ and interspecific larval interactions to demonstrate that larval adaptation to the use of very small pools for breeding affected the evolution of larval competition and cannibalism. Our results illustrate the intimate connection between breeding pool ecology, parental care and mating strategies in Peruvian poison frogs.

Tactical reproductive parasitism via larval cannibalism in Peruvian poison frogs

“…Prior observations and experiments demonstrated that adults recognize the presence of tadpoles in the pools and strongly avoid the pools containing predators and heterospecific competitors (Brown et al 2008b). Our experiments revealed that D. variabilis males prefer pools with unrelated eggs and actively deposit their tadpoles within these pools.…”

“…Dendrobates imitator, a related species of poison frog that can occur sympatrically with D. variabilis in Peru, exhibits biparental care and trophic egg feeding of tadpoles in the context of monogamous pair bonds (Brown et al 2008a). Field experiments have demonstrated that D. variabilis tadpoles typically kill and consume D. imitator tadpoles if they are placed in the same pool (Brown et al 2008b). Hence, if a male D. variabilis were able to place a tadpole into a pool used by a D. imitator pair for tadpole feeding, the D. variabilis tadpole would probably eliminate the D. imitator tadpole.…”

“…The male then transports each tadpole to another phytotelma, where they are deposited into separate pools. The transporting males choose to deposit tadpoles in pools lacking both tadpole and odonate predators to minimize cannibalism or predation of their offspring (Brown et al 2008b). But occasionally, the developing embryos slide into the pool below (during hatching or placement on the male's back) or the water level rises within the pool and the embryos are submerged, where they are less likely to be retrieved by the male ( J. L. Brown 2006, personal observation;Brown et al 2008a).…”

An Empirical Test Indicates Only Qualitatively Honest Aposematic Signaling Within a Population of Vertebrates

“…1). Although both males and females in this population have a yellow-green spotted aposematic phenotype, males are more engaged in territorial behavior, and therefore are likely the most visible to predators and researchers (Brown et al, 2008a), a trait common amongst dendrobatids (Prö hl, 2005). Many male behaviors, such as territory maintenance via calling, also reveal a male's location to potential predators.…”

Jumping into a trap: high prevalence of chytrid fungus in the preferred microhabitats of a bromeliad-specialist frog

“…Bromeliad morphological traits are generally chosen by anurans based on diverse ecological requirements such as parental care, food availability, predator avoidance, or to reduce competition (e.g. Brown et al 2008, Poelman et al 2013, Ryan & Barry 2011. Amphibians have differing degrees of association with bromeliads (e.g.…”