Abstract
A large body of knowledge about life-history traits has arisen from research on viviparous fishes of the family Poeciliidae. Still, the wide variation among species in reproductive strategies provides an excellent opportunity to further explore how life-history traits covary and the causes of covariation patterns. In this study, we provide information on brood size, offspring mass at birth, and total reproductive allotment of six poeciliid species (Gambusia sexradiata, Poeciliopsis latidens, Poeciliopsis viriosa, Priapella intermedia, Pseudoxiphophorus jonesii, and Xiphophorus hellerii). Also, we searched for a trade-off between the number of offspring that females produce and the size of each individual offspring. We tested the hypothesis that this trade-off should be stronger in small females because of the space constraints in the reproductive tract that are inherent to a small body size. If this hypothesis were correct, we expected a strong negative relationship between number and size of offspring in small females and a weaker or undetectable relationship between these two life-history traits in larger females. We found evidence of such a size-dependent trade-off in only one species. Small females of Po. latidens that produced relatively large broods experienced the cost of a reduction in the average size of each offspring. In larger females this negative relationship was weaker. Unexpectedly, we found no evidence of this trade-off in the other five poeciliid species and, in contrast, in one species (Priapella intermedia) females that produced numerous embryos were also capable of producing relatively large embryos. We discuss potential explanations for the different patterns of covariation (or lack of covariation) between number and size of offspring that we detected in these viviparous species.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Viviparous fishes of the family Poeciliidae have been the subject of numerous studies on a broad range of topics. From research on these organisms, we have gained substantial understanding of population genetics (Barson et al. 2009), animal cognition (Cummings 2018), the origin of unisexual species (Vrijenhoek 1994), social behavior (Krause et al. 2011), pre- and post-copulatory sexual selection (Evans and Pilastro 2011; Rios-Cardenas and Morris 2011), biological invasions in freshwater ecosystems (Santi et al. 2020), the effects of environmental pollutants (Gomes-Silva et al. 2020), and cancer etiology (Schartl 2014; Lu et al. 2018). A particular field of knowledge that has grown remarkably from studies on poeciliid fishes is the evolution of life histories (Johnson and Bagley 2011). We now know how distinct ecological factors, such as food availability, predation intensity, and population density can cause drastic intraspecific divergence in life-history traits such as age and size at maturity, number and size of offspring, and total reproductive investment (Johnson 2001; Moore et al. 2016; Gorini-Pacheco et al. 2018; Roth-Monzón et al. 2021). Research on life histories of poeciliids has also provided insight into the causes and consequences of the evolution of complex reproductive strategies and associated morphological structures such as placentas, placentotrophy, multiple paternity, sperm retention, and superfetation (Olivera-Tlahuel et al. 2017; Furness et al. 2019, 2021; Dekker et al. 2022; García-Cabello et al. 2022).
Despite the large body of knowledge on life history evolution that has arisen from studies on this group of viviparous fishes, some aspects still deserve attention. Here, we focus on two of these aspects. First, recent comparative studies that analyzed the evolution of reproductive modes are based on extensive datasets that contain species-specific values of several life-history traits (Pollux et al. 2014; Furness et al. 2019, 2021; Reznick et al. 2021). Even though these datasets compiled information on numerous species, they are not yet complete. Currently, the family Poeciliidae includes almost 300 species (Zúñiga-Vega et al. 2022) and, according to these datasets, life-history information is available for less than 180 species (approximately 60% of the species in the family). Furthermore, some life-history traits are underrepresented in these datasets whereas others, such as the matrotrophy index that quantifies the amount of post-fertilization provisioning to developing embryos, have been quantified for a large number of poeciliid species (Furness et al. 2021). Specifically, number of offspring produced per brood, size of each individual offspring, and total reproductive allotment (proportion of the female mass that is devoted to offspring production) are three key life-history traits that have yet to be quantified for the majority of poeciliids (Olivera-Tlahuel et al. 2015). Additional data on these life-history traits will allow future comparative studies on their evolution, similar to those that have been conducted on other reproductive traits such as placentotrophy and superfetation (Pollux et al. 2014; Furness et al. 2019, 2021; García-Cabello et al. 2022).
Second, poeciliid fishes represent an excellent model system to understand the mechanisms underlying the life-history trade-off between number and size of offspring. Studies on some poeciliids have provided empirical evidence of this life-history trade-off (Schrader and Travis 2012; Frías-Alvarez et al. 2014; O’Dea et al. 2015). However, analyses of the factors that cause this trade-off or, even more interesting, of the circumstances under which this trade-off does not occur are still needed. Pregnant females of viviparous animals have finite space within their reproductive tract that they can devote to offspring production (Sun et al. 2012). Therefore, an overall increase in reproductive effort should entail a reduction in either the number or the individual size of their offspring (i.e., they produce either numerous small or few large offspring; Warne and Charnov 2008). In this case, the trade-off may arise from a morphological constraint. However, in some animals with indeterminate growth, such as poeciliid fishes, the volume of the reproductive tract increases hyperallometrically as they age, which implies less space limitations in older and larger females (Somarakis et al. 2004; Gomes and Monteiro 2008; Kharat et al. 2008; Barneche et al. 2018). Thus, relatively old and large females should be able to allocate energy and resources into both number and size of young, whereas younger and smaller reproductive females likely experience a morphological constraint that imposes a strong offspring size-number trade-off. To date, less than a handful of studies in fishes have examined if this trade-off depends on the size or age of females (Quinn et al. 2011; O’Dea et al. 2015; Lasne et al. 2018).
In this study, we contribute to the knowledge of life histories of viviparous fishes by addressing the following objectives. (1) To provide quantitative information on number of offspring produced per brood, size of each individual offspring, and total reproductive allotment for some members of the family Poeciliidae for which data on these life-history traits are still missing. (2) To test the hypothesis that the trade-off between number and size of offspring is stronger in small reproductive females because of the morphological constraints associated with a small body size. Conversely, reaching larger sizes should relieve such space restrictions, making this trade-off undetectable in larger females.
Materials and methods
Study species. We examined pregnant females of the following six species of the family Poeciliidae: Gambusia sexradiata, Poeciliopsis latidens, Poeciliopsis viriosa, Priapella intermedia, Pseudoxiphophorus jonesii, and Xiphophorus hellerii. With the exception of G. sexradiata, these species are underrepresented in the literature of poeciliid life histories (Riesch et al. 2010). Data on number of offspring (brood size) is available for G. sexradiata, Poeciliopsis viriosa, and X. hellerii (Reznick and Miles 1989; Riesch et al. 2010; Pires et al. 2011), but lacking for the remaining three species (Po. latidens, Priapella intermedia, and Pseudoxiphophorus jonesii). Regarding offspring size at birth, there are quantitative reports for G. sexradiata, Poeciliopsis latidens, Po. viriosa, and Pseudoxiphophorus jonesii (Riesch et al. 2010; Pires et al. 2011; Olivera-Tlahuel et al. 2015), whereas the value of this life-history trait is unknown for Priapella intermedia and X. hellerii. In turn, total reproductive allotment (RA) has been quantified for G. sexradiata, Poeciliopsis viriosa, and X. hellerii (Reznick and Miles 1989; Riesch et al. 2010; Pires et al. 2011), and no information of this trait is available for the remaining three species (Po. latidens, Priapella intermedia, and Pseudoxiphophorus jonesii).
All the preserved specimens that we examined came from the National Collection of Fishes (Instituto de Biología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México). The particular regions (Mexican states) where females of our six focal species were collected were (collection years and sample sizes within parentheses): Gambusia sexradiata in southern Veracruz (2013, n = 42), Poeciliopsis latidens in central Sinaloa (2014 and 2018, n = 158), Poeciliopsis viriosa in southern Nayarit (2013, n = 35), Priapella intermedia in eastern Oaxaca (2012 and 2013, n = 78), Pseudoxiphophorus jonesii in southern Veracruz (2012 and 2013, n = 42), and Xiphophorus hellerii in eastern Oaxaca (2012, n = 82).
Quantification of life-history traits. We dissected preserved gestating females of all six species and extracted both reproductive and digestive tracts. Before dissection, we used a digital caliper to measure the standard length (SL) of each female. We counted the number of developing embryos per female and identified their stage of development according to the classification proposed by Haynes (1995). We considered embryos from stages 4 (recently fertilized egg) to 11 (mature embryo). We excluded stages 1–3 because they correspond to unfertilized ova. In the case of Poeciliopsis latidens and Po. viriosa, which are the two species that exhibit superfetation (ability of females to bear simultaneously two or more groups of embryos at different developmental stages; Turner 1937), we counted the number of simultaneous broods and recorded the number of embryos contained in each brood (i.e., the number of embryos that shared the same developmental stage). All embryos and the female body were desiccated at 55 °C during 24–48 h in a drying oven. Then, the dry mass of each embryo was estimated by dividing the dry mass of an entire brood by the number of embryos contained in that brood. Reproductive allotment (RA) was calculated as the proportion of the total dry mass of the female that consisted of developing embryos (across all broods in the case of superfetating species):
Data analyses. We searched for a size-dependent trade-off between number and size (dry mass) of embryos by means of a multi-model inference approach. We implemented a set of linear models in which we used individual embryo dry mass as response variable (transformed to natural logarithm). For the two species that exhibit superfetation (Po. latidens and Po. viriosa), we used only the estimated embryo dry mass from a single brood, which we chose randomly from each superfetating female. In this way, we did not include more than one data point per female in our models, thereby avoiding non-independence in the data (Zúñiga-Vega et al. 2007; Frías-Alvarez and Zúñiga-Vega 2016). However, to examine if our results for these two species are robust regardless of the choice of a particular brood, we also implemented all the models that we describe below using the estimated embryo mass from all the broods that were present in each superfetating female (i.e., including more than one data point per female; as per Zúñiga-Vega et al. 2007) as well as choosing a different brood.
Competing models differed in the predictor variable(s) that could affect embryo dry mass. The main predictor variable that we considered was brood size (i.e., number of embryos per brood) and, given our hypothesis of a trade-off, we expected a negative effect on embryo mass. A size-dependent trade-off (stronger in small females and weaker or non-existent in large females) was modeled by means of an interaction between female SL and brood size affecting embryo mass. From this model, we expected a strong negative relationship between number of embryos and individual embryo mass in small females and a weaker relationship (a less steep negative slope or a slope close to zero) in larger females.
Given that developmental stage may also affect individual embryo mass (embryo dry mass either decreases or increases as development progresses depending on whether the species is lecithotrophic or matrotrophic, respectively; Marsh-Matthews 2011), we built models in which stage was included either as the only predictor variable or in combination with other predictors (both as an additive and interactive effect). In addition to the aforementioned interactive effect of female SL and brood size, we also built a model in which female SL was the only predictor (large females may produce large embryos regardless of brood size and developmental stage), models that included female SL in combination with stage (additive and interactive effects), and a model with an additive effect of female SL and brood size. This latter model represents a similar offspring size-number trade-off for both small and large females, with larger females producing larger embryos overall. Finally, we also fitted an intercept-only model in which embryo mass was not affected by any predictor variable. In total, we fitted 11 competing models separately for each species. The list of models can be seen in Table 1.
To select the best model for each species we used the Akaike information criterion adjusted for small sample sizes (AICc; Burnham and Anderson 2002). The lowest AICc score was used to identify the model that provided the best fit to the data. However, in those cases where two or more models had strong support (i.e., models differing by less than two AICc units from the best-fitting model [ΔAICc < 2]), we selected the simpler model because the additional predictors did not substantially improve the model fit compared to the model with fewer parameters.
For each species, we report average values of brood size and RA (± one standard error). The only exception was RA of Po. viriosa because we could not obtain female dry masses and, consequently, we were unable to quantify this life-history trait for this species. To estimate offspring size at birth, we predicted embryo dry mass at stage 11 (mature embryo; Haynes 1995) from the particular model that included developmental stage as predictor with lowest AICc score (this particular model differed among species). If we detected an effect of female size on embryo mass, as indicated by female SL being included in the best-fitting model, we estimated offspring size at birth separately for small and large females. For this purpose, we classified females that measured less than the median SL as small females and those that measured more than the median SL as large females. Predictions of embryo mass at birth were obtained from models on the logarithmic scale, but we back-transformed them to the original scale (mg).
In addition, we compared among species the three life-history traits that we studied (embryo dry mass, brood size, and RA) accounting for the potential effect of female size on these traits (larger species may have larger embryos, broods, or RA; Promislow et al. 1992). For this purpose, we built five competing linear models that we fitted separately for each trait. These models included the following effects: (1) differences among species with no effect of female SL, (2) an effect of female SL without differences among species, (3) the additive effect of species and female SL, (4) the interaction between species and female SL, and (5) an intercept-only model in which the trait did not vary among species and was not influenced by female size. As in our previous models, embryo dry mass was transformed to natural logarithm. Given that RA is a proportion, we used an arcsine transformation (calculated as the arcsine of the square root of the proportion) to meet the assumptions of linear models (Zar 2010). In the case of brood size, which consists of counts of embryos, we implemented generalized linear models with log link function and Poisson distribution (Zuur et al. 2007). We also used AICc to select the best model for each life-history trait. Given that average female size differs among species (Table 2) and that life-history traits can be influenced by female size, we generated comparable estimates of embryo mass, brood size, and RA by calculating the expected value of these traits for a female of a common size for all species. For this purpose, we used the average female SL across all six species (32 mm). Therefore, based on the top model for each trait, we calculated the predicted values of embryo mass, brood size, and RA for a female of 32 mm SL of each species. These predicted size-adjusted values were obtained on the transformed scale and then back-transformed to their original scales (mg, number of embryos, and proportion of total female mass, respectively). All analyses were implemented in R version 4.1.3 (R Core Team 2022).
Results
Size-dependent trade-off between number and size of offspring. Only in one species, Poeciliopsis latidens, we detected a stronger offspring size-number trade-off in small females. For this species, the top model included the interaction between female SL and brood size affecting individual embryo dry mass (Table 1). This model also included an additive effect of developmental stage. All other models had poor support (ΔAICc > 7 in all cases; Table 1). The statistical relationship between brood size and embryo mass was negative for both small and large females, but the negative slope was steeper for small females (β1 = -0.020) compared to the slope for large females (β1 = -0.013) (Fig. 1a). The relationship between developmental stage and embryo mass was negative, indicating that embryos of Po. latidens lose mass as development progresses (Fig. 1b).
We obtained the same results for Po. latidens when using data from all the broods present in each superfetating female as well as using data from a distinct brood. In both cases, the top model indicated an interaction between female SL and brood size affecting embryo mass as well as an additive effect of developmental stage [Electronic Supplementary Material (ESM) Table S1]. Also in both cases, the negative relationship between brood size and embryo mass was stronger for small females than for large females (ESM Fig. S1a, b) and embryos decrease in mass throughout development (ESM Fig. S1c, d).
Additional sources of variation for embryo size. In the other five species we did not detect a trade-off between number and size of offspring. Instead, we found striking differences among species in the sources of variation for individual embryo mass. In Gambusia sexradiata three models had strong support (ΔAICc < 2), all of which included the effect of developmental stage (Table 1). The top model only included this predictor variable, whereas the second and third models included female size and brood size, respectively, in addition to stage. Thus, adding these two other predictors did not substantially improve the model fit compared to the model that only included the effect of stage. In this species, embryo mass increases slightly as development progresses (Fig. 2).
In Po. viriosa, two models had strong support and both included developmental stage and female size affecting embryo mass (Table 1). The top model indicated an additive effect of these predictors, whereas the second indicated an interactive effect. We selected the former model because it is simpler (i.e., adding the interaction term did not substantially improve the model fit). In this species, embryo mass decreases as development progresses and larger females produce larger embryos overall (Fig. 3). We obtained qualitatively similar results for Po. viriosa when analyzing data from all the broods present in each superfetating female as well as from a different brood per female. In both cases, the model that included an additive effect of stage and female SL provided the best fit to the data (ESM Table S1), larger females produced larger embryos, and embryo mass decreased throughout development (ESM Fig. S2a, b).
In Priapella intermedia, a single model had strong support (Table 1). This top model indicated an additive effect of female size and brood size on individual embryo mass. Contrary to our expectation, the statistical effect of brood size on embryo mass was positive, indicating that females that produce numerous embryos are also capable of producing relatively large embryos (Fig. 4). Also in Pr. intermedia, larger females produce larger embryos overall. In Pseudoxiphophorus jonesii, four models had strong support, all of which included female size as predictor variable (Table 1). We selected the model that only included female size (ΔAICc = 1.38), because adding other predictors did not improve the model fit with respect to this simpler model. In Ps. jonesii, larger females produce noticeably larger embryos (Fig. 5). Finally, in Xiphophorus hellerii no predictor variable had an evident effect on embryo mass as indicated by the intercept-only model having strong support (ΔAICc = 0.63) (Table 1). Even though three other models also had strong support (ΔAICc < 2), none of these provided a better fit compared to the simplest intercept-only model. For illustrative purposes only, we show in Fig. 6 that embryo mass of X. hellerii does not change throughout development.
Interspecific variation in life-history traits. We observed wide variation among species in the three life-history traits that we examined. The smallest offspring were observed in the two species of the genus Poeciliopsis (between 0.69 and 0.85 mg; Table 2). The largest offspring occurred in large females of Priapella intermedia (1.87 mg) and Pseudoxiphophorus jonesii (2.17 mg). In five of the six study species, mean brood sizes were relatively small (between 7.1 and 11.3 embryos), whereas in the sixth species (X. hellerii) females produced remarkably large broods (37.9 embryos on average; Table 2). Finally, three species (G. sexradiata, Ps. jonesii, and X. hellerii) had relatively similar RA (between 0.101 and 0.129; Table 2). The smallest RA was observed in Priapella intermedia (0.057) and the largest in Poeciliopsis latidens (0.172).
Differences in female body size among species (Table 2) only partially explain the observed interspecific variation in life-history traits. The model including the interaction between species and female SL unambiguously provided the best fit to all three traits (Table 3), indicating that the influence of female size on embryo mass, brood size, and RA differed among species (Fig. 7). Despite being medium-sized species, Priapella intermedia and Pseudoxiphophorus jonesii produce the largest embryos (Fig. 7a). In the case of number of offspring, the largest broods are indeed produced by the largest species, X. hellerii (Fig. 7b). In contrast, the greatest RA occurred in the smallest species, Poeciliopsis latidens (Fig. 7c). Size-adjusted estimates of these traits also confirmed that, for a female of the same size (32 mm SL), Priapella intermedia and Pseudoxiphophorus jonesii produce the largest embryos, X. hellerii produces the largest broods, and Poeciliopsis latidens has the greatest RA (Table 2). In addition, size-adjusted estimates also revealed that, despite their small sizes, females of both G. sexradiata and Po. latidens produce relatively large broods (Table 2).
Discussion
We have provided a series of quantitative information on brood size, offspring mass at birth, and reproductive allotment in Poeciliopsis latidens, Priapella intermedia, Pseudoxiphophorus jonesii, and Xiphophorus hellerii of the family Poeciliidae for which data on these life-history traits were still missing. In addition, we have provided evidence of a size-dependent trade-off between number and size of offspring in one of the six species that we studied. Females of Poeciliopsis latidens that produce more embryos do so at the cost of a reduction in the size of each embryo. This trade-off occurred in both small and large females of this species, but was stronger in the former. This pattern suggests that in this species, morphological constraints occur all throughout their life cycles, but are more severe in the early phases of adulthood. As females grow, such space limitations are relaxed slightly and the offspring size-number trade-off becomes less strong. However, we must notice here that we hypothesized that the trade-off should not exist or at least should be undetectable in large females, which is a pattern that did not occur in Po. latidens. Instead, the trade-off still persists as females grow, although to a lesser extent.
The body shape of species of the genus Poeciliopsis is relatively thin and fusiform (Zúñiga-Vega et al. 2007; Frías-Alvarez and Zúñiga-Vega 2016; Fleuren et al. 2018), compared to members of other poeciliid genera, which in general have deeper bodies (Gomes and Monteiro 2008; Zúñiga-Vega et al. 2011; Johnson et al. 2014). This particular morphology could explain why the offspring size-number trade-off still occurs in larger females, despite their larger body size and concomitant larger reproductive cavity. In other words, a fusiform body shape likely imposes space restrictions on all body sizes. However, this explanation is not consistent with the absence of this trade-off in the congeneric Po. viriosa, which also has a relatively thin morphology. An alternative explanation is a difference between species in food availability. The occurrence of trade-offs may depend on the external conditions rather than on (or in addition to) the intrinsic characteristics of the species (van Noordwijk and de Jong 1986). In particular, environments where food is abundant may allow females to acquire enough energetic reserves to produce numerous embryos without a detrimental effect on their individual size (Zera and Harshman 2001; Blanckenhorn and Heyland 2004). In contrast, low food availability entails energetic restrictions for females, which in turn impedes the allocation of nutrients to both number and size of embryos (Stahlschmidt and Adamo 2015; Mishra and Kumar 2019). Therefore, our collections of Po. viriosa may have come from a population where food is abundant and, in contrast, the females of Po. latidens that we examined may have come from a population where food is scarce. In addition, differences in female body size between Po. latidens and Po. viriosa can also explain the occurrence of this trade-off only in Po. latidens because females of Po. viriosa are substantially larger (37.9 mm SL on average) than females of Po. latidens (24.0 mm SL on average; Table 2). A larger body size provides a larger reproductive cavity and, hence, less space restrictions for offspring production (Saleh-Subaie et al. 2021).
Interestingly, we did not detect the offspring size-number trade-off in the other four species, suggesting a lack of morphological restrictions and/or abundant food sources. Three of these species (Priapella intermedia, Pseudoxiphophorus jonesii, and X. hellerii) have relatively large body sizes (see Table 2) and, therefore, larger reproductive tracts and looser constraints on offspring size and brood size. In fact, in Priapella intermedia, we detected a positive relationship between number and size of embryos, which is opposite to what we expected. This means that some females of this species are able to produce numerous large embryos. This ability may come from the relatively deep body of members of the genus Priapella (Riesch et al. 2012), which provides females with ample space within their reproductive cavities. In poeciliid fishes, morphology can indeed exert strong pressures on reproductive investment (Ghalambor et al. 2004; Quicazan-Rubio et al. 2019). Opposite to the apparent lack of morphological restrictions that we observed in Pr. intermedia, other species of this family have narrow bodies that impose limits on the number and size of young that females can produce. For instance, Alfaro cultratus has a narrow body and keeled ventral surface that apparently have impeded the evolution of increased reproductive allotment even in the presence of strong selective pressures that promote increased fecundity (e.g., in high-predation environments; Golden et al. 2021). Another interesting example of morphological constraints on reproduction is superfetation, which is a reproductive strategy that could have arisen in poeciliid fishes as an adaptive response to environments that favor streamlined morphologies (e.g., fast-flowing rivers; Zúñiga-Vega et al. 2010). Apparently, superfetation allows females to have high fecundities without substantial increases in the volume of their abdomens (Zúñiga-Vega et al. 2007, 2017; Fleuren et al. 2019).
Our findings also revealed that in four species (Poeciliopsis latidens, Po. viriosa, Priapella intermedia, and Pseudoxiphophorus jonesii) larger females produce larger embryos. A large size at birth can be advantageous under different ecological conditions. In environments with intense intraspecific competition, larger offspring of the least killifish (Heterandria formosa) and guppies (Poecilia reticulata) are better competitors and have higher fitness than smaller ones (Bashey 2008; Schrader and Travis 2012). In water bodies that contain toxic compounds such as hydrogen sulfide, a large size at birth confers a low surface/volume ratio and, consequently, less surface area per volume of body tissue is exposed to the toxins (Riesch et al. 2010). Large offspring likely have relatively low metabolic rates and, thus, low oxygen consumption, which could be beneficial in aquatic environments with low dissolved oxygen (Riesch et al. 2010). Moreover, intense cannibalism on juveniles also selects for larger offspring sizes, as documented in Poeciliopsis monacha (Thibault 1974; Weeks and Gaggiotti 1993). In numerous animal species, natural selection favors a large female size, which has been mostly explained as a result of the greater fecundity (i.e., larger broods) associated with a larger body (Cox et al. 2003; Lim et al. 2014; Pincheira-Donoso and Hunt 2017). Our findings indicate that, in some poeciliid species, a larger female size also conveys the selective advantage of larger newborns.
Larger females may also be capable of producing more embryos per brood (Zúñiga-Vega et al. 2011; Barneche et al. 2018) and our data confirms this positive relationship between female size and fecundity in five of our study species (with the exception of Pseudoxiphophorus jonesii; see Fig. 7b). At the interspecific level, we also observed this same pattern: the largest broods were produced by the largest species, X. hellerii. Directional selection for larger female size due to the fitness benefit of producing numerous offspring has been demonstrated in several taxa (Lefranc and Bundgaard 2000; Fox and Czesak 2006; Nali et al. 2014). Intriguingly, in all but one species reproductive allotment did not increase with female size (the only exception was Poeciliopsis latidens; see Fig. 7c), which indicates that even though females can increase the number and/or size of their offspring as they grow, the relative amount of energy that they invest in reproduction (relative with respect to their body size) remains constant throughout their lives. This unexpected finding suggests that a disproportionately greater reproductive investment by larger females may not result in a significant increase in the fitness of their young (i.e., may not increase the number of offspring surviving to sexual maturity). Instead, a disproportionately greater reproductive allotment may impose physiological costs. Interestingly, the only species in which reproductive allotment increased with female size was the same species in which we detected the trade-off between number and size of offspring, Po. latidens. Our data for this species indicate that large females of Po. latidens make a disproportionately greater reproductive investment through larger broods at the cost of a reduction in the size of each individual offspring.
Our study revealed three patterns of covariation among female size, number of offspring per brood, and embryo mass in poeciliid fishes. These distinct life-history strategies are likely shaped by ecological factors (both biotic and abiotic) and biological constraints. First, in three species (Po. latidens, Po. viriosa, and Priapella intermedia) both brood size and embryo mass increased with female size. Presumably, these species inhabit environments with high mortality rates that select for greater fecundity (Reznick et al. 1996), intense intraspecific competition that promotes large offspring size (Bashey 2008), and abundant food sources that allow females to simultaneously invest in both number and size of offspring (Taborsky 2006). Second, in two species (Gambusia sexradiata and X. hellerii) fecundity increases with female size whereas offspring mass remains invariant regardless of maternal size. Selection pressure for an optimal offspring size at birth may be strong in the habitats of these two species (Jørgensen et al. 2011). Another possibility is that smaller offspring are not viable and, hence, females are not able to further reduce offspring size in order to increase brood size (this is another plausible explanation for why the offspring size-number trade-off does not occur in these species). Alternatively, offspring size could be genetically constrained. Third, in one species (Pseudoxiphophorus jonesii) larger females produce larger embryos but brood size does not increase with female size. In this case, females may experience selection against a distended abdomen as a result of fast water currents or high predation risk, which are ecological conditions that impose strong pressures on swimming performance (Zúñiga-Vega et al. 2007; Wesner et al. 2011; Ingley et al. 2014). High fecundity entails a substantial increase in abdomen volume, which has a negative impact on swimming performance (Ghalambor et al. 2004; Quicazan-Rubio et al. 2019). Thus, a small brood size allows females of Ps. jonesii to maintain a less distended abdomen during pregnancy and, therefore, an efficient swimming performance. All these tentative explanations represent hypotheses that require empirical research.
In general, previous reports of the mode of maternal provisioning to developing embryos are not consistent with our findings. Specifically, Poeciliopsis viriosa has been considered as having incipient matrotrophy (Pollux et al. 2014; Furness et al. 2019, 2021), whereas the negative relationship between developmental stage and embryo mass that we observed in this species indicates that females rely entirely on yolk for embryo nutrition, without post-fertilization provisioning (i.e., strict lecithotrophy). In lecithotrophic species, embryo dry mass decreases throughout development due to metabolic costs (Reznick et al. 2002; Marsh-Matthews 2011). Furthermore, G. sexradiata, Priapella intermedia, Pseudoxiphophorus jonesii, and X. hellerii were previously considered as lecithotrophic (Furness et al. 2019, 2021), whereas in contrast our results suggest that these species are moderately matrotrophic (in the case of G. sexradiata) or at least capable of incipient matrotrophy (in the cases of Priapella intermedia, Pseudoxiphophorus jonesii, and X. hellerii). In G. sexradiata evidence of moderate matrotrophy comes from embryos increasing moderately in mass throughout development, which indicates that females actively transfer nutrients to embryos during gestation (Reznick et al. 2002; Marsh-Matthews 2011). In Priapella intermedia, Pseudoxiphophorus jonesii, and X. hellerii evidence of incipient matrotrophy comes from a lack of relationship between stage and embryo mass (depicted in Fig. 6 for X. hellerii), which indicates that embryos maintain a constant dry mass throughout development. In species with incipient matrotrophy, embryos feed mainly on yolk but obtain small amounts of nutrients directly from females during gestation, thereby offsetting the metabolic costs that otherwise would cause a reduction in embryo dry mass (Marsh-Matthews et al. 2001; Reznick et al. 2002; Pollux et al. 2009). The only exception was Poeciliopsis latidens because both our data and previous reports indicate that this species is lecithotrophic (Pollux et al. 2014; Furness et al. 2019, 2021).
Differences between studies can be explained by intraspecific variation in the mode of maternal provisioning to developing embryos, which in turn could arise from environmental effects on the relative amounts of pre- and post-fertilization sources of embryonic nourishment. There is now solid evidence that increased amounts of post-fertilization provisioning (i.e., higher degrees of matrotrophy) can be advantageous under particular conditions (e.g., where food is abundant or predation risk is high; Riesch et al. 2013; Gorini-Pacheco et al. 2018; Hagmayer et al. 2020) and that females of some poeciliid species can facultatively increase or decrease the nutrients that they actively transfer to embryos during gestation depending on the external conditions (specifically depending on food availability; Pires et al. 2007; Molina-Moctezuma et al. 2020).
References
Barneche DR, Robertson DR, White CR, Marshall DJ (2018) Fish reproductive-energy output increases disproportionately with body size. Science 360:642–645
Barson NJ, Cable J, van Oosterhout C (2009) Population genetic analysis of microsatellite variation of guppies (Poecilia reticulata) in Trinidad and Tobago: evidence for a dynamic source-sink metapopulation structure, founder events and population bottlenecks. J Evol Biol 22:485–497
Bashey F (2008) Competition as a selective mechanism for larger offspring size in guppies. Oikos 117:104–113
Blanckenhorn WU, Heyland A (2004) The quantitative genetics of two life history trade-offs in the yellow dung fly in abundant and limited food environments. Evol Ecol 18:385–402
Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multimodel inference. A practical information-theoretic approach, 2nd edn. Springer, New York
Cox RM, Skelly SL, John-Alder HB (2003) A comparative test of adaptive hypotheses for sexual size dimorphism in lizards. Evolution 57:1653–1669
Cummings ME (2018) Sexual conflict and sexually dimorphic cognition—reviewing their relationship in poeciliid fishes. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 72:73
Dekker ML, van Son LM, Leon-Kloosterziel KM, Hagmayer A, Furness AI, van Leeuwen JL, Pollux BJ (2022) Multiple paternity in superfetatious live-bearing fishes. J Evol Biol 35:948–961
Evans JP, Pilastro A (2011) Postcopulatory sexual selection. In: Evans JP, Pilastro A, Schlupp I (eds) Ecology and evolution of poeciliid fishes. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 197–208
Fleuren M, Quicazan-Rubio EM, van Leeuwen JL, Pollux BJA (2018) Why do placentas evolve? Evidence for a morphological advantage during pregnancy in live-bearing fish. PLoS One 13:e0195976
Fleuren M, van Leeuwen JL, Pollux BJA (2019) Superfetation reduces the negative effects of pregnancy on the fast-start escape performance in live-bearing fish. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 286:20192245
Fox CW, Czesak ME (2006) Selection on body size and sexual size dimorphism differs between host species in a seed-feeding beetle. J Evol Biol 19:1167–1174
Frías-Alvarez P, Macías Garcia C, Vázquez-Vega L, Zúñiga-Vega J (2014) Spatial and temporal variation in superfoetation and related life history traits of two viviparous fishes: Poeciliopsis gracilis and P. infans. Naturwissenschaften 101:1085–1098
Frías-Alvarez P, Zúñiga-Vega JJ (2016) Superfetation in live-bearing fishes is not always the result of a morphological constraint. Oecologia 181:645–658
Furness AI, Avise JC, Pollux BJA, Reynoso Y, Reznick DN (2021) The evolution of the placenta in poeciliid fishes. Curr Biol 31:2004–2011
Furness AI, Pollux BJA, Meredith RW, Springer MS, Reznick DN (2019) How conflict shapes evolution in poeciliid fishes. Nat Commun 10:3335
García-Cabello KN, Fuentes-González JA, Saleh-Subaie N, Pienaar J, Zúñiga-Vega JJ (2022) Increased superfetation precedes the evolution of advanced degrees of placentotrophy in viviparous fishes of the family Poeciliidae. Biol Lett 18:20220173
Ghalambor CK, Reznick DN, Walker JA (2004) Constraints on adaptive evolution: the functional trade-off between reproduction and fast-start swimming performance in the Trinidadian guppy (Poecilia reticulata). Am Nat 164:38–50
Golden KB, Belk MC, Johnson JB (2021) Predator environment does not predict life history in the morphologically constrained fish Alfaro cultratus (Cyprinodontiformes: Poeciliidae). Front Ecol Evol 9:607802
Gomes JL, Monteiro LR (2008) Morphological divergence patterns among populations of Poecilia vivipara (Teleostei Poeciliidae): test of an ecomorphological paradigm. Biol J Linn Soc Lond 93:799–812
Gomes-Silva G, Pereira BB, Liu K, Chen B, Santos VSV, de Menezes GHT, Pires LP, Santos BMT, Oliveira DM, Alves Machado PH, de Oliveira Júnior RJ, Machado de Oliveira AM, Plath M (2020) Using native and invasive livebearing fishes (Poeciliidae, Teleostei) for the integrated biological assessment of pollution in urban streams. Sci Total Environ 698:134336
Gorini-Pacheco B, Zandonà E, Mazzoni R (2018) Predation effects on matrotrophy, superfetation and other life history traits in Phalloceros harpagos. Ecol Freshw Fish 27:442–452
Hagmayer A, Furness AI, Reznick DN, Dekker ML, Pollux BJ (2020) Predation risk shapes the degree of placentation in natural populations of live-bearing fish. Ecol Lett 23:831–840
Haynes JL (1995) Standardized classification of poeciliid development for life-history studies. Copeia 1995:147–154
Ingley SJ, Billman EJ, Belk MC, Johnson JB (2014) Morphological divergence driven by predation environment within and between species of Brachyrhaphis fishes. PLoS One 9:e90274
Johnson JB (2001) Adaptive life-history evolution in the livebearing fish Brachyrhaphis rhabdophora: genetic basis for parallel divergence in age and size at maturity and a test of predator-induced plasticity. Evolution 55:1486–1491
Johnson JB, Bagley JC (2011) Ecological drivers of life-history divergence. In: Evans JP, Pilastro A, Schlupp I (eds) Ecology and evolution of poeciliid fishes. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 38–49
Johnson JB, Macedo DC, Passow CN, Rosenthal GG (2014) Sexual ornaments, body morphology, and swimming performance in naturally hybridizing swordtails (Teleostei: Xiphophorus). PLoS One 9:109025
Jørgensen C, Auer SK, Reznick DN (2011) A model for optimal offspring size in fish, including live-bearing and parental effects. Am Nat 177:E119–E135
Kharat SS, Khillare YK, Dahanukar N (2008) Allometric scaling in growth and reproduction of a freshwater loach Nemacheilus mooreh (Sykes, 1839). Electron J Ichthyol 4:8–17
Krause J, James R, Croft DP (2011) Group living. In: Evans JP, Pilastro A, Schlupp I (eds) Ecology and evolution of poeciliid fishes. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 145–154
Lasne E, Leblanc CA-L, Gillet C (2018) Egg size versus number of offspring trade-off: female age rather than size matters in a domesticated Arctic charr population. Evol Biol 45:105–112
Lefranc A, Bundgaard J (2000) The influence of male and female body size on copulation duration and fecundity in Drosophila melanogaster. Hereditas 132:243–247
Lim JN, Senior AM, Nakagawa S (2014) Heterogeneity in individual quality and reproductive trade-offs within species. Evolution 68:2306–2318
Lu Y, Boswell M, Boswell W, Kneitz S, Hausmann M, Klotz B, Regneri J, Savage M, Amores A, Postlethwait J, Warren W, Schartl M, Walter R (2018) Comparison of Xiphophorus and human melanoma transcriptomes reveals conserved pathway interactions. Pigment Cell Melanoma Res 31:496–508
Marsh-Matthews E (2011) Matrotrophy. In: Evans JP, Pilastro A, Schlupp I (eds) Ecology and evolution of poeciliid fishes. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 18–27
Marsh-Matthews E, Skierkowski P, DeMarais A (2001) Direct evidence for mother-to-embryo transfer of nutrients in the livebearing fish Gambusia geiseri. Copeia 2001:1–6
Mishra I, Kumar V (2019) The quantity–quality trade-off: differential effects of daily food availability times on reproductive performance and offspring quality in diurnal zebra finches. J Exp Biol 222:jeb196667
Molina-Moctezuma A, Hernández-Rosas AL, Zúñiga-Vega JJ (2020) Resource availability and its effects on mother to embryo nutrient transfer in two viviparous fish species. J Exp Zool A Ecol Integr Physiol 333:181–193
Moore MP, Riesch R, Martin RA (2016) The predictability and magnitude of life-history divergence to ecological agents of selection: a meta-analysis in livebearing fishes. Ecol Lett 19:435–442
Nali RC, Zamudio KR, Haddad CFB, Prado CPA (2014) Size-dependent selective mechanisms on males and females and the evolution of sexual size dimorphism in frogs. Am Nat 184:727–740
O’Dea RE, Vega-Trejo R, Head ML, Jennions MD (2015) Maternal effects on offspring size and number in mosquitofish, Gambusia holbrooki. Ecol Evol 5:2945–2955
Olivera-Tlahuel C, Ossip-Klein AG, Espinosa-Pérez HS, Zúñiga-Vega JJ (2015) Have superfetation and matrotrophy facilitated the evolution of larger offspring in poeciliid fishes? Biol J Linn Soc Lond 116:787–804
Olivera-Tlahuel C, Villagrán-Santa Cruz M, Moreno-Mendoza NA, Zúñiga-Vega JJ (2017) Morphological structures for potential sperm storage in poeciliid fishes. Does superfetation matter? J Morphol 278:907–918
Pincheira-Donoso D, Hunt J (2017) Fecundity selection theory: concepts and evidence. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 92:341–356
Pires MN, Bassar RD, McBride KE, Regus JU, Garland Jr T, Reznick DN (2011) Why do placentas evolve? An evaluation of the life-history facilitation hypothesis in the fish genus Poeciliopsis. Funct Ecol 25:757–768
Pires MN, McBride KE, Reznick DN (2007) Interpopulation variation in life-history traits of Poeciliopsis prolifica: implications for the study of placental evolution. J Exp Zool A Ecol Genet Physiol 307:113–125
Pollux BJA, Meredith RW, Springer MS, Garland T, Reznick DN (2014) The evolution of the placenta drives a shift in sexual selection in livebearing fish. Nature 513:233–236
Pollux BJA, Pires MN, Banet AI, Reznick DN (2009) Evolution of placentas in the fish family Poeciliidae: an empirical study of macroevolution. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 40: 271–289
Promislow D, Clobert J, Barbault R (1992) Life history allometry in mammals and squamate reptiles: taxon-level effects. Oikos 65:285–294
Quicazan-Rubio EM, Van Leeuwen JL, Van Manen K, Fleuren M, Pollux BJ, Stamhuis EJ (2019) Coasting in live-bearing fish: the drag penalty of being pregnant. J R Soc Interface 16:20180714
Quinn TP, Seamons TR, Vollestad LA, Duffy E (2011) Effects of growth and reproductive history on the egg size-fecundity trade-off in steelhead. Trans Am Fish Soc 140:45–51
R Core Team (2022) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.r-project.org/
Reznick DN, Butler MJ, Rodd FH, Ross P (1996) Life‐history evolution in guppies (Poecilia reticulata) 6. Differential mortality as a mechanism for natural selection. Evolution 50:1651–1660
Reznick DN, Mateos M, Springer MS (2002) Independent origins and rapid evolution of the placenta in the fish genus Poeciliopsis. Science 298:1018–1020
Reznick DN, Miles DB (1989) Review of life history patterns in poeciliid fishes. In: Meffe GK, Snelson FF (eds) Ecology and evolution of livebearing fishes (Poeciliidae). Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, pp 125–148
Reznick DN, Travis J, Pollux BJA, Furness AI (2021) Reproductive mode and conflict shape the evolution of male attributes and rate of speciation in the fish family Poeciliidae. Front Ecol Evol 9:639751
Riesch R, Martin RA, Bierbach D, Plath M, Langerhans RB, Arias-Rodriguez L (2012) Natural history, life history, and diet of Priapella chamulae Schartl, Meyer & Wilde 2006 (Teleostei: Poeciliidae). Aqua Int J Ichthyol 18:95–102
Riesch R, Martin RA, Langerhans RB (2013) Predation’s role in life-history evolution of a livebearing fish and a test of the Trexler-DeAngelis model of maternal provisioning. Am Nat 181:78–93
Riesch R, Plath M, García de León FJ, Schlupp I (2010) Convergent life-history shifts: toxic environments result in big babies in two clades of poeciliids. Naturwissenschaften 97:133–141
Rios-Cardenas O, Morris MR (2011) Precopulatory sexual selection. In: Evans JP, Pilastro A, Schlupp I (eds) Ecology and evolution of poeciliid fishes. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 187–196
Roth-Monzón AJ, Belk MC, Zúñiga-Vega JJ, Johnson JB (2021) What drives life-history variation in the livebearing fish Poeciliopsis prolifica? An assessment of multiple putative selective agents. Front Ecol Evol 8:608046
Saleh-Subaie N, Johnson JB, Zúñiga-Vega JJ (2021) Small sizes, big strategies: the relationship between female size, matrotrophy and superfetation throughout the reproductive lives of poeciliid fishes. J Zool 315:261–275
Santi F, Riesch R, Baier J, Grote M, Hornung S, Jüngling H, Plath M, Jourdan J (2020) A century later: adaptive plasticity and rapid evolution contribute to geographic variation in invasive mosquitofish. Sci Total Environ 726:137908
Schartl M (2014) Beyond the zebrafish: diverse fish species for modeling human disease. Dis Model Mech 7:181–192
Schrader M, Travis J (2012) Assessing the roles of population density and predation risk in the evolution of offspring size in populations of a placental fish. Ecol Evol 2:1480–1490
Somarakis S, Ganias K, Tserpes G, Koutsikopoulos C (2004) Ovarian allometry and the use of the gonosomatic index: a case study in the Mediterranean sardine, Sardina pilchardus. Mar Biol 146:181–189
Stahlschmidt ZR, Adamo SA (2015) Food-limited mothers favour offspring quality over offspring number: a principal components approach. Funct Ecol 29:88–95
Sun YY, Du Y, Yang J, Fu TB, Lin CX, Ji X (2012) Is the evolution of viviparity accompanied by a relative increase in maternal abdomen size in lizards? Evol Biol 39:388–399
Taborsky B (2006) The influence of juvenile and adult environments on life-history trajectories. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 273:741–750
Thibault RE (1974) Genetics of cannibalism in a viviparous fish and its relationship to population density. Nature 251:138–140
Turner CL (1937) Reproductive cycles and superfetation in poeciliid fishes. Biol Bull 72:145–164
van Noordwijk AJ, de Jong G (1986) Acquisition and allocation of resources: their influence on variation in life history tactics. Am Nat 128:137–142
Vrijenhoek RC (1994) Unisexual fish: model systems for studying ecology and evolution. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 25:71–96
Warne RW, Charnov EL (2008) Reproductive allometry and the size-number trade-off for lizards. Am Nat 172:E80–E98
Weeks SC, Gaggiotti OE (1993) Patterns of offspring size at birth in clonal and sexual strains of Poeciliopsis (Poeciliidae). Copeia 1993:1003–1009
Wesner JS, Billman EJ, Meier A, Belk MC (2011) Morphological convergence during pregnancy among predator and nonpredator populations of the livebearing fish Brachyrhaphis rhabdophora (Teleostei: Poeciliidae). Biol J Linn Soc Lond 104:386–392
Zar JH (2010) Biostatistical analysis, fifth edition. Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River
Zera AJ, Harshman LG (2001) The physiology of life history trade-offs in animals. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 32:95–126
Zuur AF, Ieno EN, Smith GM (2007) Analysing ecological data. Springer, New York
Zúñiga-Vega JJ, Aspbury AS, Johnson JB, Pollux BJA (2022) Editorial: ecology, evolution, and behavior of viviparous fishes. Front Ecol Evol 10:832216
Zúñiga-Vega JJ, Macías-Garcia C, Johnson JB (2010) Hypotheses to explain the evolution of superfetation in viviparous fishes. In: Uribe MC, Grier HJ (eds) Viviparous fishes II. New Life Publications, Homestead, pp 241–254
Zúñiga-Vega JJ, Olivera-Tlahuel C, Molina-Moctezuma A (2017) Superfetation increases total fecundity in a viviparous fish regardless of the ecological context. Acta Oecol 84:48–56
Zúñiga-Vega JJ, Reznick DN, Johnson JB (2007) Habitat predicts reproductive superfetation and body shape in the livebearing fish Poeciliopsis turrubarensis. Oikos 116:995–1005
Zúñiga-Vega JJ, Suárez-Rodríguez M, Espinosa-Pérez H, Johnson JB (2011) Morphological and reproductive variation among populations of the Pacific molly Poecilia butleri. J Fish Biol 79:1029–1046
Acknowledgments
Funding was provided by Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología, México (CONACyT) through grant number 129675. We thank Israel Solano-Zavaleta, Mariana Hernández-Apolinar, Marco Romero-Romero, and Pedro Mendoza-Hernández for providing technical assistance.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflicts of interest
All authors declare that they do not have conflict of interests.
Ethics approval
No ethics approval required because this research was based on museum specimens.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
This article is published under an open access license. Please check the 'Copyright Information' section either on this page or in the PDF for details of this license and what re-use is permitted. If your intended use exceeds what is permitted by the license or if you are unable to locate the licence and re-use information, please contact the Rights and Permissions team.
About this article
Cite this article
Zúñiga-Vega, J.J., Olivera-Tlahuel, C., Saleh-Subaie, N. et al. Life histories of poeciliid fishes: searching for a size-dependent trade-off between number and size of offspring. Ichthyol Res 71, 106–118 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10228-023-00918-0
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10228-023-00918-0