Volume 44, Issue 4 pp. 785-798
Article
Free Access

“KIN RECOGNITION” AMONG SPADEFOOT TOAD TADPOLES: A SIDE-EFFECT OF HABITAT SELECTION?

David W. Pfennig

David W. Pfennig

Department of Zoology, University of Texas, Austin, TX, 78712-1064 USA

Present address: Department of Zoology, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287-1501 USA.Search for more papers by this author
First published: July 1990
Citations: 20

Abstract

Many animals modify their behavior toward unfamiliar conspecifics as a function of their genetic relatedness. A fundamental problem of any kin recognition study is determining what is being recognized and why. For anuran tadpoles, the predominant view is that associating with relatives is kin-selected because these relatives may thereby accrue benefits through increased growth or predation avoidance. An alternative view is that kin associations are simply a side-effect of habitat selection and thus do not represent attempts to identify kin per se. In the laboratory, spadefoot toad tadpoles (Scaphiopus multiplicatus) preferentially associated with unfamiliar siblings over unfamiliar nonsiblings, as do other anurans. However, same age tadpoles also were more likely to orient toward unfamiliar nonsiblings reared on the same food (familiar food) than toward unfamiliar siblings that were reared on unfamiliar food. These results, together with the results of previous tadpole kin recognition studies, suggest that tadpoles orient toward cues learned early in ontogeny, regardless of the cues' source.

Tadpoles that preferentially associated with cues learned from their environment at birth would tend to be philopatric. Censuses of 14 natural ponds revealed that tadpole density remained greatest near oviposition sites until four days before metamorphosis. Tadpole philopatry may be advantageous: tadpoles restricted to their natal site had greater growth and survivorship than did their siblings restricted to randomly selected sites elsewhere within the same pond. Thus kin affiliative tendency observed in the laboratory in this and perhaps other species of anurans may be a byproduct of habitat selection. Since kin discrimination in animals is most commonly assayed as orientation toward kin, it follows that many examples of “kin recognition” may not represent true attempts to identify kin as such, but rather may reflect some other recognition system that is under entirely different selective pressures.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.