CHILLING-OUT AT THE CLEANING STATION!

Cleaner fish cause predators to reduce aggression toward bystanders at cleaning stations
Karen L. Cheneya, Redouan Bsharyb and Alexandra S. Gruttera

Behavioral Ecology 2008 19(5):1063-1067

Mutualisms, in which both participants gain a net benefit, are ubiquitous in all ecosystems, and the importance of understanding their broader ecological context has been demonstrated many times. Indirect effects of mutualisms may have important implications for surrounding ecosystems through changes in density, species composition, or behavior; however, the latter has been difficult to quantify. In fish cleaning mutualisms, cleaners benefit by removing and consuming ectoparasites from clients, whereas clients benefit from a reduction in parasite load. Cleaner fish are also thought to benefit from immunity to predation and use tactile stimulation as a preconflict management strategy to manipulate partners' decisions and to avoid being eaten by piscivorous client fish. Here we show, using a laboratory experiment, that the presence of cleaner fish resulted in nearby fish not involved in the cleaner–client mutualism experiencing less aggression (chases) from predatory clients. In addition, the rate that piscivorous clients chased prey was negatively correlated with the amount of tactile stimulation given to the predator by the cleaner. These data suggest that, in the laboratory, the risk of aggression from predators toward nearby prey fish was greatly reduced as a by-product of cleaner fish presence and tactile stimulation of predators by cleaner fish. These results raise the question of whether cleaning stations act as safe havens from predator aggression.

FLASHING A FLASHER

Probably the most difficult fish to photograph during its courtship display, the blue flasher wrasse (Paracheilinus cyaneus). Photo by Scott W. Michael.

Sorry folks. One more wrasse entry and then I will talk about another group of fishes. You have to realize I am still glowing in the aftermath of Volume 5, which is about 380 pages of wrasses. So, here goes another labrid topic…..

I was recently flipping through a book by Michael Aw when the name “Roger Steene” jumped off the page. Roger and I are good friends and I am always curious to see what people write about him, as he is truly a one-of-a-kind character (if you have ever been with Roger in the field, than you know what I mean!)! I started at the beginning of the paragraph that contained the Steene moniker and read on. This section of Michael’s book was talking about challenging photo subjects. He was quoting Roger, who has long said that the most difficult fish species to photograph are the flasher wrasses (genus Paracheilinus). Michael took up Roger’s challenge and presented the results at the top of the page – there was a good photo of a McCosker’s flasher (Paracheilinus mccoskeri) .

I love flasher wrasses and have been trying to take photos of them in the field for over a decade now. I have been somewhat successful after spending hours attempting to snap shots of Paracheilinus in full “flash” (definition: when fish has all fish spread and its colors flashing). Much of this is simply being lucky, but I have also learned a few techniques that I thought I would share.

One a recent trip to West Papua (the Raja Ampat Islands) as a guest of Max Ammer and Sorido Bay Resort, I had the opportunity to once again hone my flasher photography skills. Roger and I found a small group of blue flasher wrasse (Paracheilinus cyaneus) on the fringing house reef. I hate to tell you this Michael, but even within the genus, there are some species that are more difficult to shoot than others. The Paracheilinus in Michael’s book is one of the easier flashers to photograph. Roger, Gerry Allen and myself, all agree that the blue flasher and a newly described species from Triton Bay, West Papua (Paracheilinus nursalim), are the most demanding fishes to nail. This has to do with their behavior. Some flashers will hesitate momentarily when in full flash, so if you are ready, it is possible to get stellar shots with relatively little effort. But the blue flasher is not that kind of “cat!” It is always dashing about, dashing through the water like a kite in a hurricane!

Here is how I was able to get some good shots of P. cyaneus:

Reconnoiter Flasher Habitat . You will need to be prepared to scuttle around the seafloor like a nervous fiddler crab. Fortunately, flashers are most often found on rubble slopes so you don’t have to be as concerned about fins and hands damaging coral colonies. Before I go into flasher photo mode I scour the area for scorpionfish (at least big, none cryptic varieties) as it is very easy to accidentally get stung when you are moving with your eye pressed up to the viewfinder. Most of the flasher’s activities are usually limited to a relatively small area so it is possible to survey the location before getting into hunting mode. So get the lay of the land before you begin stalking your quarry.

Go flasher stalking in the late afternoon. Timing is everything! Male flashing tends to reach its apex at dusk, when these fishes spawn. Males begin courting females around an hour before the sun goes down, although less frequent flashing may occur at any time of the day.

Observe before attempting to photograph. If you watch the fish long enough, they normally have a fairly consistent routine. They may dash down to one section of rubble where some females are hanging out and flash at them for several minutes. Then they may leave this area and dash to another location where potential mates lurk near rubble recesses. It is often best to wait in one location (where there are females) and wait for the male to come soaring through.

Pre-focus and “swim the fish into focus.” Forget about using auto focus! The fish moves too quickly and the light levels are often too low to use it effectively. Instead, pre-focus the camera on something that is similar in size to the male flasher. It may be a piece of rubble or coral. Pretend that this non-moving object is the flasher wrasse and preset the focus so that the fish fills the appropriate amount of frame. (The more fish in the frame, the more difficult the shot will be to get.) I try and fill at least ½ the length of the frame with the fish, but you can back off if you want too (it is easier to shot them from a slightly greater distance). When the fish frenetically parades past, find him in the viewfinder and begin to follow his movements through the lens. When he comes into focus, quickly squeeze off a shot. The key is to keep following him with the camera and keep firing away anytime he appears to be in focus. The more shots you take, the more likelihood that you will get a real winner.

While it may sound difficult (and it is!), the more you practice it, the more likely you are to have real success. Roger and I were both very confident that we had nailed the fish you see above (we both use film so we had to wait and see our results when we got home). You can just tell when everything is right – at least when the fish and the focus are spot on. Exposure and potential flashback (back scatter) is another matter. Roger always underexposes his flasher shots by about ½ stop (using exposure compensation) to prevent possible overexposure by the flashes TTL. I don’t, but instead always shoot at smaller apertures (usually just at the limit of the TTL capacity). Of course, not only does more light to the film plan mean more likelihood of overexposing the subject, it also means more backscatter in the picture.

©2008 Scott W. Michael

A NEW FLASHER WRASSE (PARACHEILINUS)?

Paracheilinus sp. (not flashing) from Lembeh Strait, Sulawesi, Indonesia.

Paracheilinus filamentosus (not flashing), Milne Bay, Papua New Guinea.

The top photo above shows a flasher wrasse that I photographed on the “house reef” at Kungkugan Bay Resort, Lembeh Strait, Sulawesi. When I first took the shot I thought it was simply a filamented flasher wrasse (Paracheilinus filamentosus). (It is not actually flashing, but has its fins spread as it is being cleaned by a juvenile tubelip wrasse [Labropsis].) While it is no doubt similar to P. filamentosus (it has the lunate tail, has multiple dorsal fin filaments and the color pattern is similar overall), after further analysis I am convinced it is an undescribed species.

Why do I say that? Compare the size of the dorsal and anal fins of the two species above. In the Lembeh fish these fins are much deeper than those of the "true" Papua New Guinea P. filamentosus. Also, note the dorsal filaments and how close some of them are together – they almost appear to be paired, while those of the "true" P. filamentosus are more randomly distributed along the fin edge. There are similarities in the general coloration, but yet there are certainly differences. Neither individual in the photos above are exhibiting their “flashing” colors. Note the red on the dorsal and anal fins of the male Lembeh flasher. Also note the ventral coloration – the "true" P. filamentosus has a pinkish-white belly, while that of the Lembeh flasher is orangish yellow. It will take the collection of the Lembeh fish and some closer examination, as well as DNA analysis. What do you think? Different or color morphs of the same fish?

Copyright (2008) Scott W. Michael

A NEW FAIRY WRASSE RISES FROM THE CONFUSION

Cirrhilabrus beauperryi (male): a newly described species once confused with C. punctatus. Photo taken in Milne Bay, PNG. Scott W. Michael.

Cirrhilabrus beauperryi (male): the same specimen seen above exhibiting temporary spawning colors. Scott W. Michael.

There are species within the genus Cirrhilabrus that are highly variable. So variable in fact, that some ichthyophiles have suggested that more than one species may be lumped under a common binomial. Are these geographical variants or a true species? The “lumpers” would say there is only one species, while the “splitters” would argue there are two or more. Molecular analysis has enabled ichthyologists to solve some of these taxonomic quandaries once and for all. Such is the case with Cirrhilabrus punctatus - the finespotted fairy wrasse.

Cirrhilabrus punctatus (male): from Vanuatu. Scott W. Michael.

For a number of years it was thought that C. punctatus was simply a highly variable fish. It was originally described (in 1989) from Fiji, Tonga, New Caledonia, eastern Australia and southern Papua New Guinea (PNG). Many authors extended its range to include the northeastern coast of PNG and the Solomon Islands. Even though the color of the fish in this area differed from the original description of C. punctatus, it did have the characteristic dots on the head and body and was considered by many to simply be a color variant.

Cirrhilabrus punctatus (male): from Savu Savu, Fiji. Scott W. Michael.

Enter the intrepid Lord of the Reef Fishes, Dr. Gerald Allen. Recently, Dr. Allen has discovered that the fish that occurs on reefs off of Milne Bay Province (Papua New Guinea), Madang (PNG), Bismarck Archipelago, and the Solomon Islands (which has often been lumped with C. punctatus) is actually a distinct species that has been dubbed Cirrhilabrus beauperryi.

Cirrhilabrus punctatus (female): from Beqa, Fiji. Scott W. Michael.

Dr. Allen states the following regarding their chromatic differences:

“The two species are clearly separable on the basis of colour pattern. Terminal-phase individuals of C. beauperryi are generally purplish grading to blue ventrally and greenish or yellowish brown dorsally with a broad purple stripe along the basal half of the otherwise pale yellow dorsal fin. In contrast, terminal-phase C. punctatus are generally reddish brown to dark grey on the upper two-thirds of the head and body and abruptly white below with broad black stripes along the base of mainly red dorsal and anal fins. They also differ noticeably with respect to the colouration on the base of the pectoral fins: in C. beauperryi it is mainly violet with a narrow, inconspicuous purple bar; that of C. punctatus is prominently marked with a broad black bar. The pectoral-base marking is also useful for distinguishing initial-phase fish. The terminal phase of C. beauperryi also exhibits a unique median head profile characterized by a rounded forehead and concave interorbital region. DNA analysis reveals the two species are genetically distinct.”

This new species brings the number of fairy wrasses up to 45. It is the second most speciose group in the family Labridae behind the genus Halichoeres, which includes around 80 species.

References:

Allen, G. R., J. Drew and P. Barber. 2008. Cirrhilabrus beauperryi, a new wrasse (Pisces: Labridae) from Melanesia. Aqua –International Journal of Ichthyology, 14: 129-140.

Copyright (2008) Scott W. Michael

REEF FISHES VOLUME 5 ON THE HORIZON!

Front and back cover of Volume 5.

Example of a couple of pages from the Paracheilinus, flasher wrasse, section.

OK, I admit it. I have been a bad blogger. For over a month I did not contribute to my incoherent musings. I am sorry, but I think I have a good excuse. I have been diligently working on the latest Reef Fishes volume – this one on the wrasses (family Labridae). Yes, scarids (parrotfishes) are also included in the title, but they shouldn’t be as they do not get equal coverage in this volume. I apologize to you parrotfish fans from the get go. Unfortunately, because of space limitations, I could not include comprehensive coverage of both the scarids and the labrids. Since the later group is more important to the aquarium community, and I find them more interesting, I decided to invest the bulk of the book into the wrasses. The book is actually larger than it was supposed to be. It is 400 pages (the pomacentrids book was 256 pages). Of course, the labrid family is a big one – over 600 species – so I suspected that the publishers would be willing to devote a few more pages to them. But I exceeded the proposed size by at least 50 pages. The book should be available in a couple of months - I will certainly let you know on this blog. I hope you like it. Be assured, I will be adding to the blog more regularly until the next book is nearing the due date!

GLORIOUS FAIRY WRASSE!

A large male Cirrhilabrus roseafascia - the redtripe fairy wrasse - displaying at a rival. Photo Scott W. Michael.

How about that for an amazing fairy wrasse! This is a large male Cirrhilabrus roseafascia Randall & Lubbock, 1982, which is known commonly as the redstripe, roseband or pink-banded fairy wrasse. It gets around 20 cm in length and is known from New Caledonia, Vanuatu, Tonga, Fiji, Samoa, Palau and the Philippines. (Most of those in the aquarium trade are coming from Vanuatu and Tonga.) This large, beautiful fairy wrasse is found on deep reef slopes and drop-offs. It has been reported from 30 to 113 m, although juveniles may occur at lesser depths. It is a spectacular display animal (as you can see from the photograph).

The redstripe fairy wrasse tends to acclimate readily, but may acclimate more quickly if housed in a deepwater reef or dimly lit aquarium. They are not particularly aggressive, but because they tend to be larger than most congeners, they are usually the dominant fairy wrasse in the tank. It is a good jumper. Mostly females and small to medium-sized males found in the trade. The large males are ostentatious! Male C. roseafascia tend to be pink overall with an orange line along the back, often with a yellow dorsal and anal fin. It is distinguished by close relatives by the pelvic fins, with have a blue and or black and blue patch. The male in the photo above is displaying toward another fish.

The splendid fairy wrasse is certainly worthy of its name! Scott W. Michael.

There is another, closely related form that sometimes comes into the aquarium trade. It is apparently undescribed and is commonly known as the splendid or pintail fairy wrasse (Cirrhilabrus sp.). It differs from C. roseafascia in that is has a lanceolate caudal fin (a pointed tail). This species is also known from the Izu and Ryuku Islands, Taiwan, and the Philippines and reaches a maximum length of 12 cm. It has been reported from deepwater (32 to 40 m).While it has been referred to as Cirrhilabrus cf. lanceolatus in the past (Kuiter 2002), it is no doubt a distinct species. It makes it into the aquarium trade on rare occasions and does well in captivity. I have seen it available at www.liveaquaria.com on rare occasions. In fact, the specimen in the photo above was in the tank of the manager of liveaquaria.com, my fish buddy, Kevin Kohen. You can regularly find C. roseafascia at this website (click on the link on the right side of the page), although large males are less frequently available.

Copyright (2008) Scott W. Michael

DEEPWATER HOGFISH

A captive fivestripe hogfish smiles for the camera - actually, he is attacking his reflection in the aquarium glass! Photo by Scott W. Michael.

How about a cool hogfish – more exactly the fivestripe hogfish (Bodianus paraleucosticticus). It was recently described in a revision of the genus based on research done by Dr. Martin Gomon. This hogfish is a member of a group that includes a number of species which Gomon (2006) places in the subgenus Peneverreo. This includes three other species that tend to occur in deep water (usually depths of around 50 m or more) and have very scattered geographic distributions. The species in this subgenus all have narrow red or orange stripes along the body with a back spot on the base of the pectoral fin in juveniles and initial phase individuals.

It is a little known species that has been reported from Papua New Guinea, Bali, Palau, New Caledonia, Vanuatu, and the Cook Islands. It no doubt has a wider distribution than this, as it is a deepwater species that is just not captured or seen very often. Gomon (2006) reports that it occurs at depths of about 45 to at least 100 m (probably much deeper than this) on reef walls with numerous caves and ledges.

Very few of these fish have been imported for the aquarium trade. I have kept a single specimen which proved to be fairly hardy. It was quite frenetic when first added to the tank, dashing back and forth until it was so worn out it would stop, lay on its side for several minutes, and pant! It was not too aggressive and quickly learned to feed on frozen mysid shrimp. It was quite shy for some time, retreating to a cave or behind the rock work when there was activity near the tank. But after a while, it became more brazen. This B. paraleucosticticus would also display at and attack its reflection in the aquarium glass.

I would not add it to a tank with potential aggressors, like larger hogfish, other large wrasses, big damsels, or pugnacious triggerfishes. If my specimen was indicative of the species, they may hide constantly if they are picked on. Because it occurs at greater depths, it may prefer cooler water temperatures. I would suggest an optimal temperature range of 72 to 78 º Fahrenheit. So, where do you get one? I was sent the specimen I kept from Kevin Kohen at www. liveaquaria.com (see link to the right) – that is only place I have seen this available.

Copyright (2008) Scott W. Michael

JAW SLINGER! A NEW SPECIES OF EPIBULUS.

A male Epibulus brevis, the dwarf slingjaw wrasse, photographed in the Raja Ampat Islands, West Papua. Photo by Scott W. Michael.

The slingjaw wrasse (Epibulus insidiator) is a well known member of Indo-Pacific reef fish communities. It has also been recognized for some time that a strange, smaller slingjaw wrasse was lurking around coral reefs of the Western Pacific. (Some of us thought it was simply a color variant of E. insidiator.) It took ichthyologist, Dr. Bruce Carlson, to solve the Epibulus mystery, once and for all. Bruce, along with the god of reef fish taxonomy, Dr. John Randall, and molecular biologist, Michael Dawson, described Epibulus brevis, commonly known as the dwarf slingjaw wrasse, earlier this year.

The yellow color form of the female Epibulus brevis photographed in Lembeh Strait, Sulawesi. Note the black coloration on the pectoral fins. Photo by Scott W. Michael.

Carlson et al. (2008) report E. brevis from Palau, the Philippines, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, Sulawesi, Bali, Lombok, and Flores in Indonesia. I recently observed this fish in West Papua as well. It differs from E. insidiator in color. The males of this species are all brown with yellow on the throat area, on the caudal fin and a yellow marking at the opercular flap. Females vary in color from dark to light brown to yellow or almost white. The pectoral fins of the female almost always have black on the pectoral fins. The dwarf slingjaw also has longer pectoral fins than E. insidiator and there are also genetically distinct.

The brown color form of the female Epibulus brevis photographed in Lembeh Strait, Sulawesi. Note the yellow spot on the dorsum. Photo by Scott W. Michael.

What is refreshing about this paper, is that it not only deals with taxonomy issues, but also compares the biology of the two known Epibulus spp. For example, the authors examined the stomach contents of both slingjaw species. The stomach contents of 20 E. brevis consisted mostly of crustaceans (crabs and shrimps), with only one larger individual (17.2 cm [6.8 in.]) containing both fishes and crabs. They also examined the “gut” contents of 31 E. insidiator and observed that the stomachs yielded more fish than E. brevis, but also crabs, shrimps, and polychaete worms. The authors suggest that the larger size of the E. insidiator may explain their proclivity to ingest more fish (likewise, smaller E. insidiator tended to contain more crustaceans than larger conspecifics). In both species, prey was highly masticated as a result of the actions of the pharyngeal teeth.

There are also some subtle differences between the behavior of the two species. Male E. insidiator will patrol high in the water column. When patrolling, the dorsal and anal fins are contracted, while the caudal fin is spread open extended. Most of male E. insidiator activity occurs over prominent reef features such as coral promontories and large boulders, which apparently serve as sites where the fish rendezvous with potential mates. Females hover or swim slowly about these sites and occasionally bob up and down as they move near a male. According to Colin and Bell (in Carlson et al. 2008), E. brevis spawns at sunset. Males do swim around a territory and occasionally rise into the water column, but they engage in less flagrant displays than E. insidiator and usually remain nearer the sea floor. When attempting to entice a female to spawn, a male E. brevis will swim around his potential mate with all his fins collapsed. However, the median fins are spread as the pair rise into the water column to spawn. There may even be differences in habitat preferences. Epibulus insidiator tends to occur in clear, outer reef habitats, while E. brevis is more common in protected areas.

There are many more reef fishes that have long been known to reef fish taxonomists that await formal descriptions. But, I for one, and very happy that the new Epibulus has finally been given a moniker.

References

Carlson, B. A., J. E. Randall, and M. N. Dawson. 2008. A New Species of Epibulus (Perciformes: Labridae) from the West Pacific. Copiea 2008 (2): 476-483.

Copyright (2008) Scott W. Michael

The hunting duo of the Celebes Maori wrasse (Oxycheilinus celebicus) and (Parupeneus cyclostomus) posing for the camera.

One thing that excites me about exploring coral reef communities are the amazing relationships that you can readily observe in this species-packed neighborhood. Anemones and anemonefishes. Pistol shrimps and shrimpgobies. Damsels and stony corals. The list goes on and on. But some of my favorite partnerships involve feeding relationships that exist between various reef fishes. The most common of these involves a substrate-disturbing species, like most goatfishes (family Mullidae), and an opportunist, like many of the wrasses (family Labridae). (This type of feeding association is referred to by trophic biologists as “following” [clever, huh?]: the fish that is followed is called the nuclear species while the fish doing the following is known as the attendant species). The goatfish stirs the sand or rubble with its chin barbels in an attempt to find something to eat. When it does this, it attracts the attention of neighbors, like the labrids, that see the goatfish’s foraging as an opportunity to jump on otherwise cloistered prey. The goatfishes will flush concealed crustaceans and small fishes, which the wrasses pounce on as they try to elude the mullid. It has been quantitatively demonstrated that wrasses that associate with goatfish enjoy greater hunting success than those that do not. It is so important to food acquisition, that a wrasse may defend its goatfish “gravy train” from other labrids that want to join in.

As they move from one locations to the next, the goatfish often swims just below and to one side of its labrid crony.

But the most interesting feeding association, which is one that apparently benefits both partners, exists between certain wrasses and the yellowsaddle goatfish (Parupeneus cyclostomus). These two buddies are truly attached at the fin! If you look at the photos above, you will see a Celebes Maori wrasse (Oxycheilinus celebicus) and a juvenile P. cyclostomus. This pair was skulking about on the edge of a shallow fringing reef in West Papua. I watched and photographed the pair for well over 30 minutes and most of the time the two fish stayed side-by-side. Occasionally, one or the other would move off a couple feet, but invariably, this odd couple would reunite. In one case, the goatfish became separated from the wrasse and upon discovering it’s solitude, it looked agitated and began to search for the Oxycheilinus. It swam up to several fish of the appropriate size until it finally found its wrasse pal. I watched as the goatfish probed crevices with its long barbels (this mullid uses these appendages to probe crevices not sand) as the wrasse vigilantly looked on. Both fish seemed to acquire some prey during these foraging bouts.

Release the hounds! The foraging friends attempt to ferret out hidden prey.

Ormond (1980) was the first to formally describe these types of relationships in a scientific publication. He observed that the bird wrasse (Gomphosus varius) and the yellowsaddle goatfish (he uses the older binomial, Parupeneus chryseredros) engage in this behavior in the Red Sea. He coined the term “interspecific joint-hunting” to describe it. This is a type of cooperative foraging behavior. The two fish swim together until they come to a coral colony or a rocky patch. Unlike foraging by following, the two fish begin working the area over together so that both species have the potential of benefiting. In some cases, one member of the hunting party goes “around a coral head one way, while the other goes round in the other direction.” Apparently the advantage is that the fossicking behavior of one fish may herd or scare prey into the path of its accomplice. More on this and other feeding associations in the future.

Reference:

Ormond, R. F. G. 1980. Aggressive mimicry and other interspecific feeding associations among Red Sea coral reef predators. Zool. Soc. Lond. 191:247-262.

Copyright (2008) Scott W. Michael