
Recent studies on cleaning behaviour suggest that there are conflicts between cleaners and their clients over what cleaners eat. The diet of cleaners usually contains ectoparasites and some client tissue. It is unclear, however, whether cleaners prefer client tissue over ectoparasites or whether they include client tissue in their diet only when searching for parasites alone is not profitable. To distinguish between these two hypotheses, we trained cleaner fish Labroides dimidiatus to feed from plates and offered them client mucus from the parrotfish Chlorurus sordidus, parasitic monogenean flatworms, parasitic gnathiid isopods and boiled flour glue as a control. We found that cleaners ate more mucus and monogeneans than gnathiids, with gnathiids eaten slightly more often than the control substance. Because gnathiids are the most abundant ectoparasites, our results suggest a potential for conflict between cleaners and clients over what the cleaner should eat, and support studies emphasizing the importance of partner control in keeping cleaning interactions mutualistic.
690, Evolution, Reef, Labroides Dimidiatus, 0608 Zoology, Cleaning Behaviour, C1, Mutualism, Labridae, Symbioses, Animals, Parasites, Diet Preference, Social Behavior, Symbiosis, Biology, Skin, Diversity, Australia, Feeding Behavior, 06 Biological Sciences, Partner Control, Perciformes, Cooperation, Mucus, Fish Labroides-dimidiatus, Monogeneans
690, Evolution, Reef, Labroides Dimidiatus, 0608 Zoology, Cleaning Behaviour, C1, Mutualism, Labridae, Symbioses, Animals, Parasites, Diet Preference, Social Behavior, Symbiosis, Biology, Skin, Diversity, Australia, Feeding Behavior, 06 Biological Sciences, Partner Control, Perciformes, Cooperation, Mucus, Fish Labroides-dimidiatus, Monogeneans
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 168 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
