DOI: 10.5061/dryad.rfj6q57ht
title: No geographical differences in male mate choice in a widespread fish, Limia perugiae

description: Behavior, like most other traits, can have a spatial component, and
 variability of behavior at the population level is predicted. In the
 present paper, we explore male mate choice at this level. Male mate
 choice, while maybe not as common as female choice, is expected to evolve
 when males respond to significant variation in female quality and, for
 example, prefer females with higher fecundity. In fishes, higher fecundity
 is associated with larger body size, an easily measured trait. In the
 present study, we investigated the presence of male mate choice for larger
 females in a widespread species of livebearing fish, Limia perugiae, while
 comparing preferences between populations. We hypothesized that
 environmental variation, for example in the form of salinity, might result
 in population differences. Using dichotomous choice tests, we analyzed
 behavioral data for 80 individuals from seven distinct populations from
 Hispaniola. We found that L. perugiae males significantly preferred large
 females, but that there was no significant statistical variation between
 populations.
description: We collected preference data using binary choice tests. Raw data
 was collected by a human observer using stopwatches.
description: # No geographical differences in male mate choice in a widespread fish,
 Limia perugiae We tested a
 widespread species of Livebearing fish from the Dominican Republic, Limia
 perugiae for male preferences for larger female body size. We found that
 males indeed prefer larger females. However, there were no differences
 between the populations we used, although the populations differed in
 environmental variables, such as salinity. ## Description of the data and
 file structure Our data is raw data reporting typical data from binary
 choice tests. There are four data sheets in the Excel file. The first
 column of sheet 1, “Experiment” provides a unique identifier for each male
 used. The second column “Fish” provides the order in which males were
 tested. The file is sorted by population, consequently the order seems
 random. The third column refers to the population of males used. See main
 text and sheet 2 for population info, but note that alb refers to the Gold
 variant, gh46 to Balneario La Zurza, and coco to Los Cocos. The next
 column, “SVL” gives the standard length of the fish in mm. Standard length
 is measured as the distance from the snout to the end of the spinal
 column. The column “Date” provides the day of the test. The column “Trial
 #1 (TSOL)” refers to the time in seconds spent on the left side of the
 choice tank during the first half of the choice test. The three columns to
 the right give times in seconds for the time on the right side during
 trial one and – after switching the stimuli – the same information for the
 second trial. The next two columns show the combined times as total times
 spent with the larger and the smaller female. The column “Small female
 (mm)” gives the standard length of the smaller female, and the next gives
 the standard length of the larger female. The final two columns identify
 trials that showed side biases (see main text for discussion) and
 miscellaneous notes. The second sheet, “Clean Data” provides the same data
 as sheet 1 but amended with populations classified as either having
 salinity or not (Column 2, “Salinity”. The Column “Size” refers to the
 relative size of the male in the size distribution of the population (see
 main text for context). Furthermore, the column “SOP” reports the strength
 of the male preference as a corrected percentage with 0 meaning that the
 male spent all his time with the smaller female. Sheet 3 contains sex and
 size information for all fishes used in the study. See sheet 1 for column
 description. Sheet 4 provides summary data for the whole study, organized
 by population. Finally, sheet 5 (“Coordinates”) contains the coordinates
 for the sampled populations.