第四章 討論
第五節 結論
本研究發現動物的打鬥互動若越激烈，較弱勢的個體可於打鬥互動中獲得 越多資訊並展現出認輸撤退的反應。此外，在 K. marmoratus 中，唯有允許經歷 肢體互動並分出勝負之個體才會展現出顯著的勝/敗者效應；這顯示出 K.
marmoratus 個體雖然可由對手的打鬥行為獲得打鬥能力資訊，但肢體互動所提 供的資訊可能才是導致勝/敗者效應是否形成的關鍵因素，唯有獲得肢體互動所 傳遞的打鬥能力資訊並分出勝負後才足以使個體改變後續打鬥決策。透過本研 究之研究結果，我們更深入地瞭解到過去的打鬥如何對動物後續打鬥行為 造成 影響。
參考文獻
Abrahams, M. V., Robb, T. L. & Hare, J. F. 2005. Effect of hypoxia on opercular displays: evidence for an honest signal? Animal Behaviour, 70, 427-432.
Alexander, R. D. 1961. Aggressiveness, territoriality, and sexual behavior in field crickets (Orthoptera: Gryllidae). Behaviour, 17, 130-223.
Bakker, Th. C. M., Bruijn, E. F. & Sevenster, P. 1989. Asymmetrical effects of prior winning and losing on dominance in sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus).
Ethology, 82, 224-229.
Bakker, Th. C. M. & Milinski, M. 1991. Sequential female choice and the previous male effect in sticklebacks. Behavioural Ecology and Sociobiology, 29, 205-210.
Bakker, Th. C. M. & Sevenster, P. 1983. Determinants of dominance in male sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus L.). Behaviour, 86, 55-71.
Brick, O. 1998. Fighting behaviour, vigilance and predation risk in the cichlid fish Nannacara anomala. Animal Behaviour, 56, 309-317.
Briffa, M. & Elwood, R. W. 2004. Use of energy reserves in fighting hermit crabs.
Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 271, 373-379.
Casterlin, M. E. & Reynolds, W. W. 1979. Agonistic displays in the rock bass, Ambloplites rupestris. Hydrobiologia, 65, 19-21.
Candolin, U. 2003. The use of multiple cues in mate choice. Biological Reviews, 78, 575-595.
Chase, I. D., Bartolomeo, C. & Lee, A. D. 1994. Aggressive interactions and inter-contest interval: how long do winners keep winning? Animal Behaviour, 48, 393-400.
Chellappa, S., Yamamoto, M. E., Cacho, M. & Huntingford, F. A. 1999. Prior residence, body size and the dynamics of territorial disputes between male freshwater angelfish. Journal of Fish Biology, 55, 1163-1170.
Clutton-Brock, T. H. & Albon, S. D. 1979. Roaring of red deer and the evolution of honest advertisement. Behaviour, 69, 145.
Copeland, D. L., Levay, B., Sivaraman, B., Beebe-Fugloni, C. & Earley, R. L.
2011. Metabolic costs of fighting are driven by contest performance in male convict cichlid fish. Animal Behaviour, 82, 271-280.
Earley, R. L., Tinsley, M., Dugatkin, L. A. 2003. To see or not to see: does
previewing a future opponent affect the contest behavior of green swordtail males (Xiphophorus helleri)? Naturwissenschaften, 90, 226-230.
Earley, R. L., Lu, C. K., Lee, I. H., Wong, S. C. & Hsu, Y. 2013. Winner and loser effects are modulated by hormonal states. Frontiers in Zoology, 10, 6.
Enquist, M. & Leimar, O. 1983. Evolution of fighting behaviour: decision rules and assessment of relative strength. Journal of theoretical Biology, 102, 387-410.
Enquist, M., Ljungberg, T. & Zandor, A. 1987. Visual Assessment of Fighting Ability in the Cichlid Fish Nannacara anomala. Animal Behaviour, 35, 1262-1264.
Evans, C. S. 1985. Display vigour and subsequent fight performance in the Siamese fighting fish, Betta Splendens. Behavioural Processes, 11,113-121.
Harrington, R. W. Jr. 1961. Oviparous hermaphroditic fish with internal self- fertilization. Science, 134, 1749-1750.
Harrington, R. W. Jr. 1963. Twenty-four-hour rhythms of internal sef-fertilization and of oviposiotion by hermaphrodites of Rivulus marmoratus. Physiological of Zoology, 26, 325-341.
Hsu, Y., Earley, R. L. & Wolf, L. L. 2006. Modulation of aggressive behaviour by fighting experience: mechanisms and contest outcomes. Biological Reviews, 81, 33-74.
Hsu, Y., Lee, S. P., Chen, M. H., Yang, S. Y. & Cheng, K. C. 2008. Switching assessment strategy during a contest: fighting in killifish Kryptolebias marmoratus. Animal Behaviour, 75, 1641-1649.
Hsu, Y., Lee, I. H. & Lu, C. K. 2009. Prior contest information: mechanisms underlying winner and loser effects. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 63, 1247-1257.
Hsu, Y. & Wolf, L. L. 1999. The winner and loser effect: integrating multiple experiences. Animal Behaviour, 57, 903-910.
Huang, S. P., Yang, S. Y. & Hsu, Y. 2011. Persistence of winner and loser effects depends on the behaviour measured. Ethology, 117, 171-180.
Huhman, K. L., Solomon, M. B., Janicki, M., Harmon, A. C., Lin, S. M., Israel, J.
E. & Jasnow, A. M. 2003. Conditioned defeat in male and female Syrian hamsters. Hormones and Behavior, 44, 293-299.
Jakobsson, S., Brick, O. & Kullberg, C. 1995. Escalated fighting behaviour incurs
Janson, C. 1985. Aggressive competition and individual food-consumption in wild brown capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 18, 125-138.
Keeley, E. R. & Grant, J. W. A. 1993. Visual information, resource value, and sequential assessment in convict cichlid (Cichlasoma nigrofasciatum) contests.
Behavioral Ecology, 4, 345-349.
Lan, Y. & Hsu, Y. 2011. Prior contest experience exerts a long-term influence on subsequent winner and loser effects. Frontiers in Zoology, 8, 28.
Mackiewicz, M., Tatarenkov, A., Perry, A., Martin, J. R., Elder, J. F., Bechler, D.
L. & Avise, J. C. 2006. Microsatellite documentation of male-mediated outcrossing between inbred laboratory strains of the self-fertilizing mangrove killifish (Kryptolebias marmoratus). Journal of Heredity, 97, 508-513.
Mackiewicz, M., Tatarenkov, A., Turner, B. J. & Avise, J. C. 2006. A mixed-mating strategy in a hermaphroditic vertebrate. Proceedings of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 273, 2449-2452.
Marden, J. H. & Waage, J. K. 1990. Escalated damselfly territorial contests are energetic war of attrition. Animal Behaviour, 39, 954-959.
Martin, F., Beaugrand, J. P. & Lague, P. C. 1997. The role of hen’s weight and recent experience on dyadic conflict outcome. Behavioural Processes, 41, 139-150.
Neat, F. C., Taylor, A. C. & Huntingford, F. A. 1998. Proximate costs of fighting in male cichlid fish: the role of injuries and energy metabolism. Animal
Behaviour, 55, 875-882.
O'Connor, K. I., Metcalfe, N. B. & Taylor, A. C. 1999. Does darkening signal submission in territorial contests between juvenile Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar?
Animal Behaviour, 58, 1269-1276.
Otronen, M. 1990. The effect of prior experience on the outcome of fights in the burying beetle, Nicrophorus humator. Animal Behaviour, 40, 980-982.
Parker, G. A. 1974. Assessment strategy and the evolution of fighting behaviour.
Journal of theoretical Biology, 47, 223-243.
Payne, R. J. H. 1998. Gradually escalating fights and displays: the cumulative assessment model. Animal Behaviour, 56, 651-662.
Tatarenkov, A., Earley, R. L., Taylor, D. S. & Avise, J. C. 2012.
Microevolutionary distribution of isogenicity in a self-fertilizing fish
(Kryptolebias marmoratus) in the Florida Keys. Integrative and Comparative Biology, 52, 743-752.
Taylor, D. S. 1990. Adaptive specializations of the Cyprinodont fish Rivulus marmoratus. Florida Scientist, 53, 239-248.
Taylor, D. S., Fisher, M. & Turner, B. 2001. Homozygosity and heterozygosity in three populations of Rivulus marmoratus. Environmental Biology of Fishes, 61, 455-459.
Tibbetts, E. A., Mettler, A. & Levy, S. 2010. Mutual assessment via visual status signals in Polistes dominulus wasps. Biology Letters, 6, 10-13.
Turner, G. F. & Huntingford, F. A. 1986. A problem for game theory analysis:
assessment and intention in male mouthbrooder contest. Animal Behaviour, 34, 961-970.
Uetz, G. W., Roberts, J. A. & Taylor, P. W. 2009. Multimodal communication and mate choice in wolf spiders: female response to multimodal versus unimodal signals. Animal Behaviour, 78, 299-305.
Whitehouse, M. E. A. 1997. Experience influences male–male contests in the spider Argyrodes antipodiana (Theridiidae: Araneae). Animal Behaviour, 53, 913- 923.
表
表一、標準勝者處理中(測試目標個體是否得到自己打鬥能力較弱的資訊)，多 元邏輯與線性迴歸分析顯示不同激烈程度之互動處理對打鬥測試之纏鬥機率或 打鬥持續時間造成的影響。打鬥持續時間以ln(打鬥持續時間觀察值(秒)+1)進行 轉換以符合常態分布。迴歸模式中加入品系、目標個體體長、實驗配對組一個 月前打鬥勝敗結果及目標個體攻擊性作為控制因子。*P≦0.05。
纏鬥機率(N=160) 打鬥持續時間(N=154)
df b±SE χ2 P b±SE F P
互動處理 3 25.66 <0.001 * 7.07 <0.001 *
- 透明隔板1 1 -0.20±0.53 0.14 0.707 -0.32±0.33 0.97 0.327 - 無隔板1 1 -1.65±0.58 9.03 0.003 * -0.94±0.32 8.31 0.004 * - 額外互動1 1 -2.42±0.62 18.06 <0.001 * -1.36±0.33 17.24 <0.001 *
品系 4 13.54 0.009 * 2.01 0.096
體長 1 -0.05±0.05 0.94 0.332 -0.01±0.03 0.07 0.786 獲勝配對2 1 1.57±0.41 15.98 <0.001 * 0.40±0.23 3.05 0.083 攻擊性較高3 1 1.32±0.42 10.59 0.001 * -0.20±0.23 0.72 0.399
1不同的互動處理組(包含透明隔板、無隔板及額外互動處理，以接受單面鏡處理為基礎值)
2打鬥配對一個月前的打鬥結果(以落敗配對為基礎值)
3目標個體於互動處理時展現的攻擊性(以攻擊性較低為基礎值)
表二、標準敗者處理中(測試目標個體是否得到自己打鬥能力較強的資訊)，多 元邏輯與線性迴歸分析顯示不同激烈程度之互動處理對打鬥測試之纏鬥機率或 打鬥持續時間造成的影響。打鬥持續時間以ln(打鬥持續時間觀察值(秒)+1)進行 轉換以符合常態分布。迴歸模式中加入品系、目標個體體長、實驗配對組一個 月前打鬥勝敗結果及目標個體攻擊性作為控制因子。*P≦0.05。
纏鬥機率(N=160) 打鬥持續時間(N=156)
df b±SE χ2 P b±SE F P
互動處理 3 5.91 0.116 0.47 0.703
- 透明隔板1 1 0.53±0.55 0.93 0.334 0.22±0.32 0.45 0.502 - 無隔板1 1 1.31±0.58 5.43 0.020 * 0.27±0.33 0.58 0.422 - 額外互動1 1 0.29±0.55 0.28 0.598 -0.06±0.33 0.06 0.861
品系 4 40.61 <0.001 * 1.53 0.197
體長 1 0.13±0.05 6.41 0.011 * 0.06±0.03 4.13 0.044 * 獲勝組2 1 1.06±0.40 7.25 0.007 * 0.17±0.23 0.56 0.457 攻擊性(較高)3 1 0.47±0.46 1.03 0.310 0.19±0.26 0.58 0.449
1不同的互動處理組(包含透明隔板、無隔板及額外互動處理，以接受單面鏡處理為基礎值)
2打鬥配對一個月前的打鬥結果(以落敗配對為基礎值)
3目標個體於互動處理時展現的攻擊性(以攻擊性較低為基礎值)
圖
圖一、互動處理設施(以目標個體與標準勝者互動為例)。(a)到(e)的互動激烈程 度由低至高(可能獲得的資訊精確度由低至高)為：(a)單面鏡處理，允許目標個 體於目標個體隔間中觀察訓練對手、(b)透明隔板處理，雙方可隔著透明隔板相 互展示、(c)無隔板處理，打鬥雙方可自由互動攻擊至一方認輸撤退、(d)額外互 動處理，打鬥雙方自由互動至一方認輸撤退後有額外五分鐘互動。控制對手的 處理與其配對的目標個體一樣，但未給予訓練對手。
(a) (b) (c) (d)
: 標準勝者 透明玻璃隔板
訓練 對手 隔間 目標
個體
隔間 : 目標個體
單面鏡隔板
P=0.195 (34)
P=0.031 (29) P=0.081
(33) P=0.500
(35)
(a) 遞減趨勢: P=0.068
P=0.100 (39)
*P=0.005 (39)
*P<0.001 (38) P=0.209
(38)
(b) 遞減趨勢: †P=0.027
圖二、標準勝者處理(目標個體之相對打鬥能力較弱)中，打鬥測試時目標個體(■)及其相對應控制對手(□)的(a)率先攻擊機率及(b)獲勝 機率。括弧內數字為各處理組樣本數，十字†代表有顯著的遞減趨勢(Cochran-Armitage trend test)，星號*代表經Bonferroni adjustment調 整α值(0.0125)後，目標個體之率先攻擊及獲勝機率仍顯著低於0.5(one-tailed binomial test)。
*P=0.003 *P<0.001 (a)
P=0.707 *P=0.004 *P<0.001
(b)
P=0.327
圖三、(a)標準勝者處理中，打鬥測試的打鬥纏鬥機率，打鬥測試時纏鬥發生的機率。(b)標準勝者處理中，打鬥測試打鬥持續時間，
打鬥持續時間以ln(打鬥持續時間觀察值(秒)+1)進行轉換。星號*代表迴歸分析中與單面鏡處理有顯著差異。
P=0.500 (37)
P=0.094 (37)
*P=0.003 (38) P=0.309
(36)
(a) 遞增趨勢: P=0.119
P=0.739 (39)
P=0.168 (39)
*P=0.003 (38) P=0.563
(40)
(b) 遞增趨勢:
P=0.063
圖四、標準敗者處理(目標個體之相對打鬥能力較強)中，打鬥測試時目標個體(■)及其相對應控制對手(□)的(a)率先攻擊機率及(b)獲勝 機率。括弧內數字為各處理組樣本數，率先攻擊及獲勝機率皆無顯著的遞增趨勢(Cochran-Armitage trend test)，星號*代表經Bonferroni adjustment調整α值(0.0125)後，目標個體之率先攻擊及獲勝機率仍顯著高於0.5(one-tailed binomial test)。
*P=0.020 (a)
P=0.334 P=0.598
(b)
P=0.422
P=0.502 P=0.861
圖五、(a)標準敗者處理中，打鬥測試的打鬥纏鬥機率，打鬥測試時纏鬥發生的機率。(b)標準敗者處理中，打鬥測試打鬥持續時間，
打鬥持續時間以ln(打鬥持續時間觀察值(秒)+1)進行轉換。星號*代表迴歸分析中與單面鏡處理有顯著差異。