# monogamy ?



## somecanadianguy (Jan 9, 2007)

u guys seen this BBC - Earth News - Peru poison frog reveals secret of monogamy
craig


----------



## hexentanz (Sep 18, 2008)

awwwwwwwww! hehe


----------



## Julio (Oct 8, 2007)

i wonder if the same holds true if you kep a trio in captivity.


----------



## somecanadianguy (Jan 9, 2007)

Julio said:


> i wonder if the same holds true if you kep a trio in captivity.


thats exactly what i was thinking too , kinda why i posted this too see responces.
craig


----------



## D3monic (Feb 8, 2010)

Hmm very interesting. So if you had two breeding pairs and put them all in the same tank there wouldnt be any swapage or same room? (by room I mean puddle) ...doesnt sound much like paradise to me. Altho some experimentation could be in order. if this is true then theoretically you could put two breeding pairs of different imitators together with little fear of cross breading. Altho I could see females of the other species possibly eating eggs. I would be very interested in following along if someone was willing to experiment with this.


----------



## Julio (Oct 8, 2007)

also, what happens when the one of hte mates dies? do they go search for another or do they just go on living with no interest in breeding?


----------



## azure89 (Jan 5, 2009)

I don't know if I completely believe this because i have four tarapoto imitators in a forty gallon (one male and three females) and I have seen two of the females lay eggs not just one, but maybe this is just referrring to the standard imitator being monogamus.


----------



## decev (Dec 3, 2009)

The article did mention 1 out of 12 males that mated with two females. I bet having three females within 2 feet of the male at all times could possibly make this a moot point as far as vivariums are concerned. It was already said above, but an experiment on this would be cool.


----------



## azure89 (Jan 5, 2009)

Yea that's true being confined in a box with multiple females could probably make any guy cheat ahaha


----------



## dendro-dude (Jan 25, 2010)

There should really be an experiment. It would clear things up...or am i the only one who is confused?


----------



## jig1 (Sep 7, 2008)

thats a pretty neat little article About the questions in captivity I think it could be varied results... the article sited that they mostly stayed together because the small size of the water pools the tadpoles were in so in our enclosures and different laying sites and set ups could manipulate the monogamy thing but it does catch your curiosity tho huh?


----------



## Tim F (Jan 27, 2006)

Being confined must change their habits, as the only imis that I have that are monogamous are the ones that have been paired off. I have 2.1 in one viv where both males tranport and call the female to feed their own tads. I also have a group of 8-10 or so where they definitely mix it up, so it never occured to me that they could or would tend toward monogamy. Whenever a male calls the females fight, and the winner gets him (ah, reminds me of hs/college days ).

In nature they're able to chose there own mates. Ours, at best get to choose from a very small pool, but are essentially stuck with whatever we can offer them. Maybe that's the difference.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

From what I gathered, the monogomy is resource driven.. increasing the availability of the limiting resource reduces the demand for monogomy which then changes the behavior. The article was also lacking in indication whether this was a serial monogomy or a more "permanent" pairing. If it is a more permanent pairing, then a larger study group may indicate higher levels of infidelity more in line with that seen in all other "monogomous" animals (including animals that show high levels of fidelity like swans or paired birds..) 

Ed


----------



## jesseblack (Mar 26, 2007)

Ed,
We have no clue if they bond for life, these results are only for a period of 3-6 months, per pair (more or less the wet season- though in some populations they do breed year round). The main reason for this observation period was it is very difficult to observe these guys in the field egg feeding repeatedly and basic identification of families is much hard than one would think. It took me about a year of field work (over a period of 4 years) to collect all the data on the 12 families. 
For all the people transposing these results to a terrarium, I highly doubt the results would hold true, no matter how large or elaborate your terrarium, factors affecting mating system and breeding behaviors likely do not reflect nature. To name a few differences (captivity vs. wild): endless food, fixed number of reproductive resources, lack of predators and relevant competitors, the inability to setup natural territories, no immigration or the ability to emigrate elsewhere... all these factor likely have dramatic consequences. These frogs are fantastic in the terrarium, however we need to keep in mind that most of their behaviors are only shadows of the their wild counterparts. Thus, the value of these observations in captivity would likely be controversial (though I am biased). Our observations on captive frogs, though often very important, do not always reflect their behavior in nature (e.g. egg feeding in R. reticulata). 

Thanks for your interest and I love seeing people discuss this. 

Cheers,
Jason Brown


----------



## wcsbackwards (Oct 4, 2008)

Hi Jason, 

Just wondering, was this a microsatellite analysis?


----------



## jeeperrs (Jan 14, 2010)

Ed said:


> From what I gathered, the monogomy is resource driven.. increasing the availability of the limiting resource reduces the demand for monogomy which then changes the behavior. The article was also lacking in indication whether this was a serial monogomy or a more "permanent" pairing. If it is a more permanent pairing, then a larger study group may indicate higher levels of infidelity more in line with that seen in all other "monogomous" animals (including animals that show high levels of fidelity like swans or paired birds..)
> 
> Ed


This is very similar the human behavior. We are naturally monogamous except when resources are high. When resources are high we behave like...Tiger Woods ha-ha. I think almost every species has a "social" side to them. We give "instinct" too much credit and "learning" not enough. That is just my two cents for animal behavior in general


----------



## jesseblack (Mar 26, 2007)

wcsbackwards said:


> Hi Jason,
> 
> Just wondering, was this a microsatellite analysis?


Yep, we used 6 different loci...


----------



## jesseblack (Mar 26, 2007)

jesseblack said:


> Ed,
> We have no clue if they bond for life, these results are only for a period of 3-6 months, per pair (more or less the wet season- though in some populations they do breed year round). The main reason for this observation period was it is very difficult to observe these guys in the field egg feeding repeatedly and basic identification of families is much hard than one would think. It took me about a year of field work (over a period of 4 years) to collect all the data on the 12 families.
> For all the people transposing these results to a terrarium, I highly doubt the results would hold true, no matter how large or elaborate your terrarium, factors affecting mating system and breeding behaviors likely do not reflect nature. To name a few differences (captivity vs. wild): endless food, fixed number of reproductive resources, lack of predators and relevant competitors, the inability to setup natural territories, no immigration or the ability to emigrate elsewhere... all these factor likely have dramatic consequences. These frogs are fantastic in the terrarium, however we need to keep in mind that most of their behaviors are only shadows of the their wild counterparts. Thus, the value of these observations in captivity would likely be controversial (though I am biased). Our observations on captive frogs, though often very important, do not always reflect their behavior in nature (e.g. egg feeding in R. reticulata).
> 
> ...


Sorry about repeating myself (in the end of the post).... I had started writing this up and was interrupted and when I came back to it I was hurried by my girlfriend to get off my computer....


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Hi Jason,



jesseblack said:


> Ed,
> We have no clue if they bond for life, these results are only for a period of 3-6 months, per pair (more or less the wet season- though in some populations they do breed year round). The main reason for this observation period was it is very difficult to observe these guys in the field egg feeding repeatedly and basic identification of families is much hard than one would think. It took me about a year of field work (over a period of 4 years) to collect all the data on the 12 families.


I had figured that it had taken a while to get the information needed for the paper.. I didn't mean to sound critical of the paper as I found it interesting. 

I wouldn't be surprised if resource allocation resulted in a more permanent bonding. 

Ed


----------



## wcsbackwards (Oct 4, 2008)

Very cool, thank you.



jesseblack said:


> Yep, we used 6 different loci...


----------

