1997
DOI: 10.1006/anbe.1997.0504
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Responses to conspecific and heterospecific olfactory cues in the swordtailXiphophorus cortezi

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

2
74
1
2

Year Published

1999
1999
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 109 publications
(79 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
2
74
1
2
Order By: Relevance
“…[44][45][46]. The vestigial-preference hypothesis is consistent with these findings, makes novel predictions, and avoids some of the shortcomings of earlier approaches to historical influences.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 64%
“…[44][45][46]. The vestigial-preference hypothesis is consistent with these findings, makes novel predictions, and avoids some of the shortcomings of earlier approaches to historical influences.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 64%
“…However, we used only adult zebrafish, having a length over 15 mm (Engeszer et al 2007) since shoaling develops when visual system is completely mature (Buske and Gerlai 2010). In addition, stimulus and subject fish were separated by a transparent barrier allowing the transmission of visual cues while attenuating any potential non-visual cues (i.e., olfactory cues) used in the conspecific identification (McLennan and Ryan 1997).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In aquatic systems, chemical cues are very important due to the properties of water as a solvent and its ability to disperse these cues, while other cues (e.g., visual cues) are used in short-range communication, as vision is strongly influenced by depth, complexity and turbidity of the aquatic habitat (Douglas and Hawryshyn 1990;Ward et al 2007). Thus, in fish, communication via olfactory cues has been demonstrated to play a crucial role with respect to homing, schooling and shoaling, sibling recognition and the recognition of conspecifics and population members (Olsén 1986;Courtenay et al 1997;McLennan and Ryan 1997;Behrmann-Godel et al 2006). The ability to compensate for a restricted use of one sense, for example triggered by a limited visual environment, by the enhanced acuity in another sense (''compensatory plasticity hypothesis'': Rauschecker and Kniepert 1994), is known as ''sensory plasticity''.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%