FISHF.RV BULLETIN: VOL. 69, NO. 3 



Figure 10. — Sharpnose seaperch inspecting a blacksmith, 

 which hovers to solicit cleaning. 



Specific Cleaning Interactions— Seaperch- 

 Blacksmith 



The limited observations on cleaning by sharp- 

 nose seaperch provide details only on interac- 

 tions with blacksmiths. As nearly as could be 

 seen, when sharjinose seaperch clean blacksmiths 

 the activity proceeds much as it does when black- 

 smiths are cleaned by senoritas, as described 

 above. However, the observations were too few 

 to determine whether or not cleaning activity 

 is consistently initiated by the cleaner. Several 

 times blacksmiths hovered in their typical head- 

 down posture before seemingly unresponsive sea- 

 perch, but perhaps the sea])erch had earlier made 

 some initial gesture. Whenever it could be de- 

 termined, the seaperch initiated the cleaning. 



Some details were obtained at the 20- to 25-m 

 location at La Jolla, where two seai)erch, known 



to have been cleaning blacksmiths, were each 

 kept under surveillance for 15 min, while their 

 activity was monitored on tape. Both swam on 

 irregular courses among the rocks but remained 

 within an area encompassing about 15 to 20 m'. 

 During this time one entered into 4, the other 5, 

 separate cleaning bouts, averaging 2.6 (range 

 0.5-7.5) and 1.8 (range 0.75-3.5) min long, re- 

 spectively, all with blacksmiths. The cleaner ini- 

 tiated the activity in each instance, but immedi- 

 ately thereafter a number of other blacksmiths 

 converged on the spot. Most of the cleaning 

 bouts continued after the original blacksmith had 

 left the group, and a succession of others arrived 

 and departed before the bout ended. Although 

 usually they hovered head-down Ijefore the clean- 

 ers, the blacksmiths nevertheless assumed a wide 

 variety of attitudes. During much of the time 

 they swam with the blacksmiths, the two sea- 

 perch under surveillance closely inspected the 

 Ijlacksmith's bodies and actually picked at them 

 18 and 14 times, respectively. Most of the clean- 

 ing was directed at the fin bases, particularly 

 the caudal. While in company with the black- 

 smiths, one of the seaperch broke away from the 

 group and swam to look closely at the dorsal fin 

 of a blue rockfish. However, no cleaning oc- 

 curred: the blue rockfish swam away as though 

 uninterested in cleaning and the seaperch re- 

 turned to the blacksmiths. When not in company 

 with the blacksmiths, the two seaperch swam 

 alone 1 or 2 m over the substrate. One descended 

 to the bottom twice and picked at gorgonians: 

 five times on the first descent, once on the 

 second. 



Once a blacksmith was seen obviously attempt- 

 ing to present its caudal fin to a seaperch, with- 

 out success in enticing the seajserch to clean. 

 Close inspection did not reveal parasites, but 

 part of the fin was torn away and shredded 

 flesh was exjiosed. Ajiparently this Ijlacksmith 

 was presenting a point of irritation to the clean- 

 er, which in this instance was an injury, not a 

 parasite. Some cleaners, for example, Abudef- 

 diif troscheUi, which i)icks molting skin from the 

 Oalaiiagos marine iguana (Hobson. 1969b). 

 will clean dead or injured itssue, but at least 

 (in this occasion the seaperch showed no inter- 

 est. 



512 



