The African Cichlid Fish Astatotilapia burtoni Uses Acoustic Communication for Reproduction: Sound Production, Hearing, and Behavioral Significance

Sexual reproduction in all animals depends on effective communication between signalers and receivers. Many fish species, especially the African cichlids, are well known for their bright coloration and the importance of visual signaling during courtship and mate choice, but little is known about what role acoustic communication plays during mating and how it contributes to sexual selection in this phenotypically diverse group of vertebrates. Here we examined acoustic communication during reproduction in the social cichlid fish, Astatotilapia burtoni. We characterized the sounds and associated behaviors produced by dominant males during courtship, tested for differences in hearing ability associated with female reproductive state and male social status, and then tested the hypothesis that female mate preference is influenced by male sound production. We show that dominant males produce intentional courtship sounds in close proximity to females, and that sounds are spectrally similar to their hearing abilities. Females were 2–5-fold more sensitive to low frequency sounds in the spectral range of male courtship sounds when they were sexually-receptive compared to during the mouthbrooding parental phase. Hearing thresholds were also negatively correlated with circulating sex-steroid levels in females but positively correlated in males, suggesting a potential role for steroids in reproductive-state auditory plasticity. Behavioral experiments showed that receptive females preferred to affiliate with males that were associated with playback of courtship sounds compared to noise controls, indicating that acoustic information is likely important for female mate choice. These data show for the first time in a Tanganyikan cichlid that acoustic communication is important during reproduction as part of a multimodal signaling repertoire, and that perception of auditory information changes depending on the animal's internal physiological state. Our results highlight the importance of examining non-visual sensory modalities as potential substrates for sexual selection contributing to the incredible phenotypic diversity of African cichlid fishes

The EOD Sound Response in Weakly Electric Fish

1. A spontaneous EOD response to sound is described in two gymnotoids of the pulse Electric Organ Discharge (EOD) type, Hypopomus and Gymnotus, and in one mormyrid, Brienomyrus (Figs. 2-4). 2. In all three species, the EOD response to the sound onset was a transient EOD rate increase. In the low EOD rate Hypopomus (3-6 EODs/s at rest) the first, second, or third EOD interval following sound onset was significantly shorter than the average EOD interval before stimulation. The shortest latency found was 100 ms, the longest ca. 1.2 s. Gymnotus (around 50 EODs/s at rest) responded similarly, but the third interval after sound onset was the first to be affected even at highest intensities (shortest latencies approx. 60 ms; latencies >0.5 s at low sound intensities). In Brienomyrus (4-8 EODs/s at rest) the response occurred already at the first EOD interval after sound onset. 3. An EOD sound response was recorded in Hypoporous and in Gymnotus up to 5,000 Hz sound frequency (in one Gymnotus individual: up to 7,000 Hz). Due to technical limitations the low frequency limit of the response could not be exactly determined: the fishes responded well even below 100 Hz. Hypopomus had its maximum sensitivity around 500 Hz (Fig. 5), Gymnotus around 1,000 Hz (Fig. 6). 4. In all three species the EOD sound response was graded with sound intensity (Hypopomus: Fig. 7). 5. No EOD response to sound was found in two gymnotoids of the wave type, Eigenmannia and Apteronotus, and in the gymnotoid pulse fish Rhamphichthys. A criterion is proposed by which it should be possible to predict whether or not a weakly electric fish species will show the EOD sound response. 6. It is concluded that the EOD response to sound is similar to EOD responses to other kinds of stimulation (light, touch, vibration, food, and even electrical). The possible biological function is discussed