Data from: The costs and benefits of paternal care in fish: a meta-analysis
Data files
Aug 21, 2020 version files 1.10 MB
-
GoldbergetalEffectSizeCalculations.R
31.50 KB
-
GoldbergetalEffectSizeData.csv
68.25 KB
-
GoldbergetalRCode.R
94.62 KB
-
GoldbergetalStudyLevelData.csv
12.45 KB
-
GoldbergetalSuppMethods.pdf
822.27 KB
-
GoldbergetalSuppTables.xlsx
48.80 KB
-
README.txt
22.87 KB
Aug 26, 2020 version files 1.13 MB
-
README.txt
22.92 KB
-
rspb20201759EffectSizeCalculations.R
31.50 KB
-
rspb20201759EffectSizeData.csv
68.25 KB
-
rspb20201759RCode.R
94.84 KB
-
rspb20201759StudyLevelData.csv
12.45 KB
-
rspb20201759SuppMethods.pdf
852.42 KB
-
rspb20201759SuppTables.xlsx
48.81 KB
Abstract
Male-only parental care, while rare in most animals, is a widespread strategy within teleost fish. The costs and benefits to males of acting as sole carer are highly variable between fish species making it challenging to determine the selective pressures driving the evolution of male-only care to such a high prevalence. We conducted a phylogenetic meta-analysis to examine the costs and benefits of paternal care across fish species. We found no evidence that providing care negatively affects male condition. In contrast to other taxa, we also found limited evidence that male care has evolved as a strategy to improve offspring survival. Instead, we found that males already caring for a brood are preferred by females and that this preference is strongest in those species in which males work harder to care for larger broods. Thus, in fish, investment in offspring care does not constrain a male’s mating success but rather augments it, suggesting that the relatively high prevalence of male-only care in fish may be in part explained by sexual selection through female preference for caring males.
Usage notes
Details of all files given in README.txt file