Abstract
Mutualistic interactions involve 2 species beneficially cooperating, but it is not clear how these interactions are maintained. In many mutualisms, one species interacts with multiple species, and since partners differ in terms of the commodities they trade, partner identity will directly influence the decisions and behaviors of interacting individuals. Here, we investigated the consequences of within and between-species diversity on a model cleaner–client interaction in a natural environment, by quantifying the behavior of both partners. We found that the predominant Caribbean cleaner fish, the sharknose goby (Elacatinus evelynae), shows personality variation as we documented repeatable individual differences in activity, boldness, and exploratory behaviors. Personality variation was associated with cleaner–client interactions: cleaner boldness and activity were significantly related to posing by clients and cleaning, respectively. Cleaner personality variation was also associated with the functional identity (sociality, mobility, body size, and trophic level) of clients posing and being cleaned. We thus demonstrate that partner identity can have consequences on mutualistic outcomes which will contribute to the context-dependency and highly heterogeneous patterns we observe at a population level. We also suggest that within- and between-species differences have consequences on partner choice, a feature that has been previously thought to be absent from these cleaner–client interactions.
Highlights
Mutualistic interactions, where 2 species beneficially cooperate, are observed in all ecosystems (Bronstein 2015), yet it is still not clear how these interspecific interactions are maintained
Cleaners were more exploratory as the time into day increased (GLMM, β = 0.06, χ21 = 4.05, P = 0.044) and there was evidence for habituation as activity scores increased over the sampling period (GLMM, β = 0.03, χ21 = 4.93, P = 0.026) and cleaners were bolder on the second replicate of each stimulus presentation compared with the first, irrespective of method (GLMM, β = 0.06, χ21 = 5.84, P = 0.016), boldness did decrease across the sampling period (GLMM, β = −0.10, χ21 = 9.53, P = 0.002)
Previous studies have documented social context influencing the expression of personality traits (Webster and Ward 2011; McDonald et al 2016; Bevan et al 2018), but here we found that the number of cleaners occupying a station did not affect personality scores (GLMMs, P > 0.05)
Summary
Mutualistic interactions, where 2 species beneficially cooperate, are observed in all ecosystems (Bronstein 2015), yet it is still not clear how these interspecific interactions are maintained. Mutualisms often involve food resources (e.g., nectar and ectoparasites) being traded for a beneficial act (e.g., pollination; Landry 2012, parasite removal; Arnal et al 2001), known as service–resource interactions (Holland et al 2005), but not all partners are equal in terms of the commodities they trade (Palmer et al 2015). These interspecific interactions involve 2 individuals directly interacting at any one time, and the behaviors and traits of one partner, could directly influence the behaviors and traits of the other (Wolf and Weissing 2012). The mutualism involves a cleaner removing ectoparasites and other material from
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call