Aktipis, C. A. (2004). Know when to walk away: contingent movement and the evolution of cooperation. J. Theor. Biol., 231, 249–260.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Arnold, C. and Taborsky, B. (2010). Social experience in early ontogeny has lasting effects on social skills in cooperatively breeding cichlids. Anim. Behav., 79, 621–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Aubin-Horth, N., Desjardins, J. K., Martei, Y. M., Balshine, S., and Hofmann, H. A. (2007). Masculinized dominant females in a cooperatively breeding species. Mol. Ecol., 16, 1349–1358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Awata, S., Munehara, H., and Masanori, K. (2005). Social system and reproduction of helpers in a cooperatively breeding cichlid fish (Julidochromis ornatus) in Lake Tanganyika: field observations and parentage analyses. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol., 58, 506–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Balshine, S., Leach, B., Neat, F., Reid, H., Taborsky, M., et al. (2001). Correlates of group size in a cooperatively breeding cichlid fish (Neolamprologus pulcher). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol., 50, 134–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Balshine-Earn, S., Neat, F. C., Reid, H., and Taborsky, M. (1998). Paying to stay or paying to breed? Field evidence for direct benefits of helping behavior in a cooperatively breeding fish. Behav. Ecol., 9, 432–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bender, N., Heg, D., Hamilton, I. M., Bachar, Z., Taborsky, M., et al. (2006). The relationship between social status, behaviour, growth and steroids in male helpers and breeders of a cooperatively breeding cichlid. Horm. Behav., 50, 173–182.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Bender, N., Taborsky, M., and Power, D. M. (2008a). The role of prolactin in the regulation of brood care in the cooperatively breeding fish Neolamprologus pulcher. J. Exp. Zool., 309A, 515–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bender, N., Heg-Bachar, Z., Oliveira, R. F., Canario, A. V. M., and Taborsky, M. (2008b). Hormonal control of brood care and social status in a cichlid fish with brood care helpers. Physiol. Behav., 94, 349–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bergmüller, R. and Taborsky, M. (2005). Experimental manipulation of helping in a cooperative breeder: helpers "pay to stay" by pre-emptive appeasement. Anim. Behav., 69, 19–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bergmüller, R. and Taborsky, M. (2007). Adaptive behavioural syndromes due to strategic niche specialization. BMC Ecology, 7, 12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Bergmüller, R. and Taborsky, M. (2010). Animal personality due to social niche specialisation. Trends Ecol. Evol., 25, 504–511.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Bergmüller, R., Heg, D., and Taborsky, M. (2005a). Helpers in a cooperatively breeding cichlid stay and pay or disperse and breed, depending on ecological constraints. Proc. R. Soc. London B, 272, 325–331.Google ScholarPubMed

Bergmüller, R., Heg, D., Peer, K., and Taborsky, M. (2005b). Extended safe havens and between-group dispersal of helpers in a cooperatively breeding cichlid. Behaviour, 142, 1643–1667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Blumer, L. S. (1979). Male parental care in bony fishes. Q. Rev. Biol., 54, 149–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Blumer, L. S. (1982). A bibliography and categorization of bony fishes exhibiting parental care. Zool. J. Linn. Soc., 76, 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bourke, A. F. G. (2011). Principles of Social Evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brawand, D., Wagner, C.E., Li, Y. I., Malinsky, M., Keller, I., et al. (2014). The genomic substrate for adaptive radiation in African cichlid fish. Nature, 513, 375–381.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Breder, C. M. and Rosen, D. E. (1966). Modes of Reproduction in Fishes. Garden City, NY: Natural History Press.Google Scholar

Brichard, P. (1978). Fishes of Lake Tanganyika. Neptune City, NJ: T. F. H. Publishers.Google Scholar

Brouwer, L., Heg, D., and Taborsky, M. (2005). Experimental evidence for helper effects in a cooperatively breeding cichlid. Behav. Ecol., 16, 667–673.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brown, J. L. (1987). Helping and Communal Breeding in Birds: Ecology and Evolution. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bruintjes, R. and Taborsky, M. (2008). Helpers in a cooperative breeder pay a high price to stay: effects of demand, helper size and sex. Anim. Behav., 75, 1843–1850.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bruintjes, R. and Taborsky, M. (2011). Size-dependent task specialization in a cooperative cichlid in response to experimental variation of demand. Anim. Behav., 81, 387–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bruintjes, R., Hekman, R., and Taborsky, M. (2010). Experimental global food reduction raises resource acquisition costs of brood care helpers and reduces their helping effort. Funct. Ecol., 24, 1054–1063.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bruintjes, R., Bonfils, D., Heg, D., and Taborsky, M. (2011). Paternity of subordinates raises cooperative effort in cichlids. Plos One, 6(10), e25673.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Cant, M. A. (2011). The role of threats in animal cooperation. Proc. R. Soc. London B, 278, 170–178.Google ScholarPubMed

Cant, M. A. and Johstone, R. A. (2009). How threats influence the evolutionary resolution of within-group conflict. Am. Nat., 173, 759–771.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Champagne, F. A. (2010). Epigenetic influence of social experiences across the lifespan. Devel. Psychobiol., 52, 299–311.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Chervet, N., Zöttl, M., Schürch, R., Taborsky, M., and Heg, D. (2011). Repeatability and heritability of behavioural types in a social cichlid. Int. J. Evol. Biol., 2011, 321729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Desjardins, J. K., Fitzpatrick, J. L., Stiver, K. A., van der Kraak, G. J., and Balshine, S. (2008a). Costs and benefits of polygyny in the cichlid Neolamprologus pulcher. Anim. Behav., 75, 1771–1779.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Desjardins, J. K., Stiver, K. A., Fitzpatrick, J. L., Milligan, N., van der Kraak, G. J., et al. (2008b). Sex and status in a cooperative breeding fish: behavior and androgens. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol., 62, 785–794.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Desjardins, J. K., Stiver, K. A., Fitzpatrick, J. L., and Balshine, S. (2008c). Differential responses to territory intrusions in cooperatively breeding fish. Anim. Behav., 75, 595–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dey, C. J., Reddon, A. R., O’Connor, C. M., and Balshine, S. (2013). Network structure is related to social conflict in a cooperatively breeding fish. Anim. Behav., 85, 395–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dierkes, P., Taborsky, M., and Kohler, U. (1999). Reproductive parasitism of broodcare helpers in a cooperatively breeding fish. Behav. Ecol., 10, 510–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dierkes, P., Heg, D., Taborsky, M., Skubic, E., and Achmann, R. (2005). Genetic relatedness in groups is sex-specific and declines with age of helpers in a cooperatively breeding cichlid. Ecol. Lett., 8, 968–975.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Donaldson, Z. R. and Young, L. J. (2008). Oxytocin, vasopressin, and neurogenetics of sociality. Science, 322, 900–904.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Duftner, N., Sefc, K. M., Koblmüller, S., Salzburger, W., Taborsky, M., et al. (2007). Parallel evolution of facial stripe patterns in the Neolamprologus brichardi/N. pulcher species complex endemic to Lake Tanganyika. Mol. Phyl. Evol., 45, 706–715.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Emlen, S. T. (1982). The evolution of helping. 1. An ecological constraints model. Am. Nat., 119, 29–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fischer, S., Zöttl, M., Groenewoud, F., and Taborsky, B. (2014). Group-size-dependent punishment of idle subordinates in a cooperative breeder where helpers pay to stay. Proc. R. Soc. London B, 281, 20140184.Google Scholar

Fitzpatrick, J. L., Desjardins, J. K., Stiver, K. A., Montgomerie, R. and Balshine, S. (2006). Male reproductive suppression in the cooperatively breeding fish Neolamprologus pulcher. Behav. Ecol., 17, 25–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gashagaza, M. M. (1988). Feeding activity of a Tanganyikan cichlid fish Lamprologus brichardi. African Study Monogr., 9, 1–9.Google Scholar

Gaston, A. J. (1978). The evolution of group territorial behavior and cooperative breeding. Am. Nat., 112, 1091–1100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Godwin, J. and Thompson, R. (2012). Nonapeptides and social behavior in fishes. Horm. Behav., 61, 230–238.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Grantner, A. and Taborsky, M. (1998). The metabolic rates associated with resting, and with the performance of agonistic, submissive and digging behaviours in the cichlid fish Neolamprologus pulcher (Pisces: Cichlidae). J. Comp. Physiol. B, 168, 427–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Griesser, M., Nystrand, M., and Ekman, J. (2006). Reduced mortality selects for family cohesion in a social species. Proc. R. Soc. London B, 273, 1881–1886.Google Scholar

Griffin, A. S. and West, S. A. (2003). Kin discrimination and the benefit of helping in cooperatively breeding vertebrates. Science, 302, 634–636.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Gross, M. R. and Sargent, R. C. (1985). The evolution of male and female parental care in fishes. Am. Zool., 25, 807–822.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hager, R. and Jones, C. B., eds. (2009). Reproductive Skew in Vertebrates: Proximate and Ultimate Causes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hamilton, I. M. and Heg, D. (2008). Sex differences in the effect of social status on the growth of subordinates in a co-operatively breeding cichlid. J. Fish Biol., 72, 1079–1088.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hamilton, I. M. and Taborsky, M. (2005a). Contingent movement and cooperation evolve under generalized reciprocity. Proc. R. Soc. London B, 272, 2259–2267.Google ScholarPubMed

Hamilton, I. M. and Taborsky, M. (2005b). Unrelated helpers will not fully compensate for costs imposed on breeders when they pay to stay. Proc. R. Soc. London B, 272, 445–454.Google Scholar

Hamilton, I. M., Heg, D., and Bender, N. (2005). Size differences within a dominance hierarchy influence conflict and help in a cooperatively breeding cichlid. Behaviour, 142, 1591–1613.Google Scholar

Hamilton, W. D. (1964). The genetical evolution of social behaviour I and II. J. Theor. Biol., 7, 1–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heg, D. (2008). Reproductive suppression in female cooperatively breeding cichlids. Biol. Lett., 4, 606–609.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Heg, D. and Bachar, Z. (2006). Cooperative breeding in the Lake Tanganyika cichlid Julidochromis ornatus. Envir. Biol. Fishes, 76, 265–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heg, D. and Hamilton, I. M. (2008). Tug-of-war over reproduction in a cooperatively breeding cichlid. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol., 62, 1249–1257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heg, D. and Taborsky, M. (2010). Helper response to experimentally manipulated predation risk in the cooperatively breeding cichlid Neolamprologus pulcher. PLoS One, 5(5), e10784.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Heg, D., Bachar, Z., Brouwer, L., and Taborsky, M. (2004a). Predation risk is an ecological constraint for helper dispersal in a cooperatively breeding cichlid. Proc. R. Soc. London B, 271, 2367–2374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heg, D., Bender, N., and Hamilton, I. (2004b). Strategic growth decisions in helper cichlids. Proc. R. Soc. London B, 271, S505–S508.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Heg, D., Bachar, Z., and Taborsky, M. (2005a). Cooperative breeding and group structure in the Lake Tanganyika cichlid Neolamprologus savoryi. Ethology, 111, 1017–1043.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heg, D., Brouwer, L., Bachar, Z., and Taborsky, M. (2005b). Large group size yields group stability in the cooperatively breeding cichlid Neolamprologus pulcher. Behaviour, 142, 1615–1641.Google Scholar

Heg, D., Bergmuller, R., Bonfils, D., Otti, O., Bachar, Z., et al. (2006). Cichlids do not adjust reproductive skew to the availability of independent breeding options. Behav. Ecol., 17, 419–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heg, D., Jutzeler, E., Bonfils, D., and Mitchell, J. S. (2008a). Group composition affects male reproductive partitioning in a cooperatively breeding cichlid. Mol. Ecol., 17, 4359–4370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heg, D., Heg-Bachar, Z., Brouwer, L., and Taborsky, M. (2008b). Experimentally induced helper dispersal in colonially breeding cooperative cichlids. Envir. Biol. Fishes, 83, 191–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Heg, D., Rothenberger, S., and Schürch, R. (2011). Habitat saturation, benefits of philopatry, relatedness, and the extent of co-operative breeding in a cichlid. Behav. Ecol., 22, 82–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hick, K., Reddon, A. R., O’Connor, C. M., and Balshine, S. (2014). Strategic and tactical fighting decisions in cichlid fishes with divergent social systems. Behaviour, 151, 47–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hirschenhauser, K., Taborsky, M., Oliveira, T., Canario, A. V. M., and Oliveira, R. F. (2004). A test of the “challenge hypothesis” in cichlid fish: simulated partner and territory intruder experiments. Anim. Behav., 68, 741–750.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hirschenhauser, K., Canario, A. V., Ros, A. F., Taborsky, M., and Oliveira, R. F. (2008). Social context may affect urinary excretion of 11-ketotestosterone in African cichlids. Behaviour, 145, 1367–1388.Google Scholar

Hochberg, M. E., Rankin, D. J., and Taborsky, M. (2008). The coevolution of cooperation and dispersal in social groups and its implications for the emergence of multicellularity. BMC Evol. Biol., 8, 238.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Houston, A. I., Szekely, T., and McNamara, J. M. (2005). Conflict between parents over care. Trends. Ecol. Evol., 20, 33–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Johnstone, R. A. (2011). Load lightening and negotiation over offspring care in cooperative breeders. Behav. Ecol., 22, 436–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Johnstone, R. A., Manica, A., Fayet, A. L., Stoddard, M. C., Rodriguez-Girones, M. A. et al. (2014). Reciprocity and conditional cooperation between great tit parents. Behav. Ecol., 25, 216–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jordan, L. A., Wong, M. Y., and Balshine, S. S. (2010). The effects of familiarity and social hierarchy on group membership decisions in a social fish. Biol. Lett., 6, 301–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kingma, S. A., Santema, P., Taborsky, M., and Komdeur, J. (2014). Group augmentation and the evolution of cooperation. Trends Ecol. Evol., 29, 476–484.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Knapp, R., Wingfield, J. C., and Bass, A. H. (1999). Steroid hormones and paternal care in the plainfin midshipman fish (Porichthys notatus). Horm. Behav., 35, 81–89.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Koenig, W. D., Pitelka, F. A., Carmen, W. J., Mumme, R. L., and Stanback, M. T. (1992). The evolution of delayed dispersal in cooperative breeders. Q. Rev. Biol., 67, 111–150.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Kohler, U. (1997). Zur Struktur und Evolution des Sozialsystems von Neolamprologus multifasciatus (Cichlidae, Pisces), dem kleinsten Schneckenbuntbarsch des Tanganjikasees. Ph.D. thesis, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, München, Germany.Google Scholar

Kokko, H., Johnstone, R. A., and Clutton-Brock, T.H. (2001). The evolution of cooperative breeding through group augmentation. Proc. R. Soc. London B, 268, 187–196.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Kokko, H., Johnstone, R. A., and Wright, J. (2002). The evolution of parental and alloparental effort in cooperatively breeding groups: when should helpers pay to stay? Behav. Ecol., 13, 291–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Komdeur, J. (2006). Variation in individual investment strategies among social animals. Ethology, 112, 729–747.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Komdeur, J. and Ekman, J. (2010). Adaptations and constraints in the evolution of delayed dispersal: implications for cooperation. In: Social Behaviour: Genes, Ecology and Evolution, ed. Szekely, T., Moore, A. J. and Komdeur, J.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 306–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Konings, A. (1998). Tanganyika Cichlids in Their Natural Habitat. El Paso, TX: Cichlid Press.Google Scholar

Kuwamura, T. (1997). The evolution of parental care and mating systems among Tanganyikan cichlids. In: Fish Communities in Lake Tanganyika, ed. Kawanabe, H., Hori, M., and Nagoshi, M.), Kyoto, Japan: Kyoto University Press, pp. 57–86.Google Scholar

Le Vin, A., Mable, B., and Arnold, K. (2010). Kin recognition via phenotype matching in a cooperatively breeding cichlid, Neolamprologus pulcher. Anim. Behav., 79, 1109–1114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Le Vin, A., Mable, B., Taborsky, M., Heg, D., and Arnold, K. (2011). Individual variation in helping in a cooperative breeder: relatedness versus behavioural type. Anim. Behav., 82, 467–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lehmann, L. and Keller, L. (2006). The evolution of cooperation and altruism – a general framework and a classification of models. J. Evol. Biol., 19, 1365–1376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ligon, J. D. and Ligon, S. H. (1978). Communal breeding in green woodhoopoes as a case for reciprocity. Nature, 276, 496–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Limberger, D. (1983). Pairs and harems in a cichlid fish, Lamprologus brichardi. Z. Tierpsychol., 62, 115–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McNamara, J. M., Houston, A. I., Barta, Z., and Osorno, J. L. (2003). Should young ever be better off with one parent than with two? Behav. Ecol., 14, 301–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mileva, V. R., Gilmour, K. M., and Balshine, S. (2011). Effects of maternal stress on egg characteristics in a cooperatively breeding fish. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. A, 158, 22–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mitchell, J. S., Jutzeler, E., Heg, D., and Taborsky, M. (2009a). Gender differences in the costs that subordinate group members impose on dominant males in a cooperative breeder. Ethology, 115, 1162–1174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mitchell, J. S., Jutzeler, E., Heg, D., and Taborsky, M. (2009b). Dominant members of cooperatively-breeding groups adjust their behaviour in response to the sexes of their subordinates. Behaviour, 146, 1665–1686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

O’Connell, L. A., Matthews, B. J., and Hofmann, H. A. (2012). Isotocin regulates paternal care in a monogamous cichlid fish. Horm. Behav., 61, 725–733.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Oliveira, R. F., Hirschenhauser, K., Canario, A. V. M., and Taborsky, M. (2003). Androgen levels of reproductive competitors in a co-operatively breeding cichlid. J. Fish Biol., 63, 1615–1620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Poll, M. (1974). Contribution à la faune ichthyologique du lac Tanganika, d’après les récoltes de P. Brichard. Rev. Zool. Afri., 88, 99–110.Google Scholar

Raihani, N. J., Thornton, A., and Bshary, R. (2012). Punishment and cooperation in nature. Trends Ecol. Evol., 27, 288–295.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Reale, D., Dingemanse, N. J., Kazem, A. J., and Wright, J. (2010). Evolutionary and ecological approaches to the study of personality. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. London B, 365, 3937–3946.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Reddon, A. R., Voisin, M. R., Menon, N., Marsh-Rollo, S. E., et al. (2011a). Rules of engagement for resource contests in a social fish. Anim. Behav., 82, 93–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Reddon, A. R., Balk, D., and Balshine, S. (2011b). Sex differences in group-joining decisions in social fish. Anim. Behav., 82, 229–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Reddon, A. R., O’Connor, C. M., Marsh-Rollo, S. E., and Balshine, S. (2012). Effects of isotocin on social responses in a cooperatively breeding fish. Anim. Behav., 84, 753–760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Reddon, A. R., Voisin, M. R., O’Connor, C. M., and Balshine, S. (2014). Isotocin and sociality in the cooperatively breeding cichlid fish, Neolamprologus pulcher. Behaviour, 151, 1389–1411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Riebli, T., Avgan, B., Bottini, A. M., Duc, C., Taborsky, M., and Heg, D. (2011). Behavioral type affects dominance and growth in staged encounters of cooperatively breeding cichlids. Anim. Behav., 81, 313–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Riebli, T., Taborsky, M., Chervet, N., Apolloni, N., Zuercher, Y., et al. (2012). Behavioural type, status and social context affect behaviour and resource allocation in cooperatively breeding cichlids. Anim. Behav., 84, 925–936.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ros, A. F. H., Bruintjes, R., Santos, R. S., Canario, A. V. M., and Oliveira, R. F. (2004). The role of androgens in the trade-off between territorial and parental behavior in the Azorean rock-pool blenny, Parablennius parvicornis. Horm. Behav., 46, 491–497.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Rutte, C., Taborsky, M., and Brinkhof, M. W. G. (2006). What sets the odds of winning and losing? Trends Ecol. Evol., 21, 16–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Sargent, R. C. and Gross, M. R. (1986). William’s principle: An explanation of parental care in teleost fishes. In: The Behaviour of Teleost Fishes, ed. Pitcher, T. J.. London: Croom Helm, pp. 275–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schreier, T. (2013). Punishment motivates subordinate helper to pay to stay and to compensate after a period of reduced helping. Bachelor thesis, University of Bern, Switzerland.Google Scholar

Schürch, R. and Heg, D. (2010a). Life history and behavioral type in the highly social cichlid Neolamprologus pulcher. Behav. Ecol., 21, 588–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schürch, R. and Heg, D. (2010b). Variation in helper type affects group stability and reproductive decisions in a cooperative breeder. Ethology, 116, 257–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schürch, R., Rothenberger, S., and Heg, D. (2010). The building-up of social relationships: behavioural types, social networks and cooperative breeding in a cichlid. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. London B, 365, 4089–4098.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Siemens, M. (1990). Broodcare or egg cannibalism by parents and helpers in Neolamprologus brichardi (Poll 1986) (Pisces: Cichlidae): a study on behavioural mechanisms. Ethology, 84, 60–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Skubic, E., Taborsky, M., McNamara, J. M., and Houston, A. I. (2004). When to parasitize? A dynamic optimization model of reproductive strategies in a cooperative breeder. J. Theor. Biol. 227, 487–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Solomon, N. G. and French, J. A., eds. (1997). Cooperative Breeding in Mammals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Stacey, P. B. and Koenig, W. D., eds. (1990). Cooperative Breeding in Birds: Long Term Studies of Ecology and Behavior. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stacey, P. B. and Ligon, J. D. (1991). The benefits of philopatry hypothesis for the evolution of cooperative breeding: variance in territory quality and group size effects. Am. Nat., 137, 831–846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stiver, K. A., Dierkes, P., Taborsky, M., and Balshine, S. (2004). Dispersal patterns and status change in a co-operatively breeding cichlid Neolamprologus pulcher: evidence from microsatellite analyses and behavioural observations. J. Fish Biol., 65, 91–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stiver, K. A., Dierkes, P., Taborsky, M., Gibbs, H. L., and Balshine, S. (2005). Relatedness and helping in fish: examining the theoretical predictions. Proc. R. Soc. London B, 272, 1593–1599.Google ScholarPubMed

Stiver, K. A., Fitzpatrick, J., Desjardins, J. K., and Balshine, S. (2006). Sex differences in rates of territory joining and inheritance in a cooperatively breeding cichlid fish. Anim. Behav., 71, 449–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stiver, K., Desjardins, J., Fitzpatrick, J., Neff, B., Quinn, J., et al. (2007). Evidence for size and sex-specific dispersal in a cooperatively breeding cichlid fish. Mol. Ecol., 16, 2974–2984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stiver, K., Fitzpatrick, J., Desjardins, J., Neff, B., Quinn, J., et al. (2008). The role of genetic relatedness among social mates in a cooperative breeder. Behav. Ecol., 19, 816–823.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stiver, K., Fitzpatrick, J., Desjardins, J., and Balshine, S. (2009). Mixed parentage in Neolamprologus pulcher groups. J. Fish Biol., 74, 1129–1135.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Taborsky, B. and Oliveira, R. F. (2012). Social competence: an evolutionary approach. Trends Ecol. Evol., 27, 679–688.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Taborsky, B., Skubic, E., and Bruintjes, R. (2007). Mothers adjust egg size to helper number in a cooperatively breeding cichlid. Behav. Ecol., 18, 652–657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Taborsky, B., Arnold, C., Junker, J., and Tschopp, A. (2012). The early social environment affects social competence in a cooperative breeder. Anim. Behav., 83, 1067–1074.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Taborsky, B., Tschirren, L., Meunier, C., and Aubin-Horth, N. (2013). Stable reprogramming of brain transcription profiles by the early social environment in a cooperatively breeding fish. Proc. R. Soc. London B, 280, 20122605.Google Scholar

Taborsky, M. (1982). Brutpflegehelfer Beim Cichliden Lamprologus Brichardi, Poll (1974): Eine Kosten/Nutzen-Analyse. Ph. D. thesis, Universität Wien, Austria.Google Scholar

Taborsky, M. (1984). Broodcare helpers in the cichlid fish Lamprologus brichardi: their costs and benefits. Anim. Behav., 32, 1236–1252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Taborsky, M. (1985). Breeder-helper conflict in a cichlid fish with broodcare helpers: an experimental analysis. Behaviour, 95, 45–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Taborsky, M. (1994). Sneakers, satellites, and helpers: parasitic and cooperative behavior in fish reproduction. Adv. Study Behav., 23, 1–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Taborsky, M. (2009). Reproductive skew in cooperative fish groups: virtue and limitations of alternative modeling approaches. In: Reproductive Skew in Vertebrates: Proximate and Ultimate Causes, ed. Hager, R. and Jones, C. B.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 265–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Taborsky, M. and Grantner, A. (1998). Behavioural time-energy budgets of cooperatively breeding Neolamprologus pulcher (Pisces: Cichlidae). Anim. Behav., 56, 1375–1382.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Taborsky, M. and Limberger, D. (1981). Helpers in fish. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol., 8, 143–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Taborsky, M., Hert, E., Siemens, M., and Stoerig, P. (1986). Social behaviour of Lamprologus species: functions and mechanisms. Ann. Mus. Roy. Afr. Sci. Zool., 251, 7–11.Google Scholar

Taves, M. D., Desjardins, J. K., Mishra, S., and Balshine, S. (2009). Androgens and dominance: Sex-specific patterns in a highly social fish (Neolamprologus pulcher). Gen. Comp. Endocrinol., 161, 202–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Werner, N. Y., Balshine, S., Leach, B., and Lotem, A. (2003). Helping opportunities and space segregation in cooperatively breeding cichlids. Behav. Ecol., 14, 749–756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Whittington, C. M. and Wilson, A. B. (2013). The role of prolactin in fish reproduction. Gen. Comp. Endocrinol., 191, 123–136.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Wiley, R. H. and Rabenold, K. N. (1984). The evolution of cooperative breeding by delayed reciprocity and queuing for favorable social positions. Evolution, 38, 609–621.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Wong, M. and Balshine, S. (2011). The evolution of cooperative breeding in the African cichlid fish, Neolamprologus pulcher. Biol. Rev., 86, 511–530.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Wong, M., Jordan, L., Marsh-Rollo, S., St-Cyr, S., Reynolds, J., et al. (2012). Mating systems in cooperative breeders: the roles of resource dispersion and conflict mitigation. Behav. Ecol., 23, 521–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ziegler, T. E. (2000). Hormones associated with non-maternal infant care: a review of mammalian and avian studies. Folia Primatol., 71, 6–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Zöttl, M., Heg, D., Chervet, N., and Taborsky, M. (2013a). Kinship reduces alloparental care in cooperative cichlids where helpers pay-to-stay. Nature Comm., 4, 1341.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Zöttl, M., Frommen, J. G., and Taborsky, M. (2013b). Group size adjustment to ecological demand in a cooperative breeder. Proc. R. Soc. London B, 280, 20122772.Google Scholar

Zöttl, M., Fischer, S., and Taborsky, M. (2013c). Partial brood care compensation by female breeders in response to experimental manipulation of alloparental care. Anim. Behav., 85, 1471–1478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Zöttl, M., Chapuis, L., Freiburghaus, M., and Taborsky, M. (2013d). Strategic reduction of help before dispersal in a cooperative breeder. Biol. Lett., 9, 20120878.CrossRefGoogle Scholar