Sexual dimorphism in northern temperate spiders: Implications for the differential mortality model

Journal of Zoology

Volumn 243, Issue 2, 1997, Pages 341-349

  Prenter, J ^a   Montgomery, W I ^a   Elwood, R W ^a  

^a QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY BELFAST   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DIFFERENTIAL MORTALITY HYPOTHESIS; LIFE HISTORY; SEXUAL SIZE DIMORPHISM; SPIDER;

IRELAND; UK;

ARANEAE;

EID: 0030701933     PISSN: 09528369     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-7998.1997.tb02787.x     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Andersson, M. (1994). Sexual selection. Princeton N.J.: Princeton University Press.
2. Arak, A. (1988). Sexual dimorphism in body size: a model and a test. Evolution 42: 820-825.
3. Blackburn, T. (1991). The interspecific relationship between egg size and clutch size in wildfowl. Auk 108: 209-211.
4. Coddington, J. A. (1994). The roles of homology and convergence in studies of adaptation. In Phylogenetics and ecology: 53-78. Eggleton, P. & Vane-Wright. R. (Eds). London: Academic Press.
5. Coddington, J. A. & Levi, H. W. (1991). Systematics and evolution of spiders (Araneae). Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 22: 565-592.
6. Darwin, C. (1871). The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex. London: Murray.
7. Downes, M. F. (1981). Sexual dimorphism in Latrodectus (Araneae, Theridiidae). Aust. J. Ecol. 6: 289-290.
8. Elgar, M A. (1991). Sexual cannibalism, size dimorphism, and courtship behaviour in orb-weaving spiders (Araneidae). Evolution 45: 444-448.
9. Elgar, M. A. (1992). Sexual cannibalism in spiders and other invertebrates. In Cannibalism: ecology and evolution among diverse taxa: 128-155. Elgar, M. A. & Crespi, B. J. (Eds). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
10. Elgar, M. A., Ghaffar, N. & Read, A. F. (1990). Sexual dimorphism in leg length among orb-weaving spiders: a possible role for sexual cannibalism. J. Zool. (Lond.) 222: 455-470.
11. Felsenstein, J. (1985). Phylogenies and the comparative method. Am. Nat. 125: 1-15.
12. Garland, T., Jr. Harvey, P. H. & Ives. A. R. (1992). Procedures for the analysis of comparative data using phylogenetically independent contrasts. Syst, Zool. 41: 18-32.
13. Ghiselin, M. T. (1974). The economy of nature and the evolution of sex. Berkeley: University of California Press.
14. Gittleman, J. L. & Decker, D. M. (1994). The phylogeny of behaviour. In Behaviour and evolution: 80-105. Slater, P. J. B. & Halliday, T. R. (Eds). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
15. Gittleman, J. L. & Kot, M. (1990). Adaptation: statistics and a null model for estimating phylogenetic effects. Syst. Zool. 39: 227-241.
16. Gittleman, J. L. & Luh, H.-K. (1992). On comparing comparative methods. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 23: 383-404.
17. Gittleman. J. L. & Luh, H.-K. (1993). Phylogeny, evolutionary models, and comparative methods: a simulation study. In Phylogenetics and ecology: 103-122. Eggleton, P. & Vane-Wright, R. (Eds). London: Academic Press.
18. Grafen, A. (1989). The phylogenetic regression. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Land. B Biol. Sci. 326: 119-156.
19. Harvey, P. H. & Pagel. M. D. (1991). The comparative method in evolutionary biology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
20. Harvey, P. H. & Purvis, A. (1991). Comparative methods for explaining adaptations. Nature (Lond.) 351: 619-624.
21. Head, G. (1995). Selection on fecundity and variation in the degree of sexual size dimorphism among spider species (Class Araneae). Evolution 49: 776-781.
22. Hormiga, G., Eberhard, W. G. & Coddington, J. A. (1995). Web-construction behaviour in Australian Phonognatha and the phylogeny of Nephiline and Tetragnathid spiders (Araneae: Tetragnathidae). Aust. J. Zool. 43: 313-364.
23. Levi, H. W. (1975). Additional notes on the orb-weaving genera Araneus, Hypsosinga, and Singa north of Mexico (Araneae, Araneidae). Psyche 82: 265-274.
24. Luh, H.-K., Gittleman, J. L. & Kot, M. (1994). Phylogenetic autocorrelation. Program. Department of Zoology, University of Tennessee, Knoxville.
25. Main, B. Y. (1990). Dwarf males in mygalomorph spiders: adaptation to environmental hazards. Acta Zool. Fenn. 190: 273-278.
26. Marshall. S. D. & Gittleman, J. L. (1994). Clutch size in spiders: is more better? Fund. Ecol. 8: 118-124.
27. McFerran. D. M. & Ross, H. G. C. (1993). Checklist of the spiders of Ireland. Bull. Ir. Biogeogr. Soc. 16: 32-48.
28. Pagel, M. D. (1992). A method for the analysis of comparative data. J. Theor. Biol. 156: 431-442.
29. Pagel, M. D. & Harvey, P. H. (1988). Recent developments in the analysis of comparative data. Q. Rev. Biol. 63: 413-440.
30. Pagel, M. D. & Harvey, P. H. (1989). Comparative methods for examining adaptation depend on evolutionary models. Folia Primatol. 53: 203-220.
31. Platnick, N. I. (1989). Advances in spider taxonomy, 1981-1987. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
32. Platnick, N. I. (1993). Advances in spider taxonomy, 1988-1991. New York: New York Entomological Society.
33. Prenter, J., Elwood, R. W. & Montgomery, W. I. (In prep.). Sexual size dimorphism and reproductive investment by female spiders: a comparative analysis.
34. Prenter, J., Montgomery, W. I. & Elwood, R. W. (1995). Multivariate morphometrics and sexual dimorphism in the orb-web spider Metellina segmentata (Clerck, 1757) (Araneae, Metidae). Biol J. Linn. Soc. 55: 345-354.
35. Purvis, A., Gittleman, J. I.. & Luh, H.-K. (1994). Truth or consequences: Effects of phylogenetic accuracy on two comparative methods. J. Theor. Biol. 167: 293-300.
36. Purvis, A. & Rambaut, A. (1994). Comparative analysis by independent contrasts (CAIC), version 2. Program. Department of Zoology, Oxford University.
37. Roberts, M. J. (1985). The spiders of Great Britain and Ireland. I. Atypidae to Theridiosomatidae. Colchester: Harley.
38. Roberts, M. J. (1993). The spiders of Great Britain and Ireland. Compact edn. Colchester: Harley.
39. Robinson, M. H. & Robinson, B. (1980). Comparative studies of the courtship and mating behaviour of tropical araneid spiders. Pac. Insects Monogr. 36: 1-218.
40. Rubenstein, D. I. (1987). Alternative reproductive tactics in the spider Meta segmentata. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 20: 229-237.
41. Shear, W. A. (1986). Spiders. Webs, behaviour and evolution. Stanford, USA: Stanford University Press.
42. Shine, R. (1988). The evolution of large size in females: a critique of Darwin's "fecundity advantage" model. Am. Nat. 131: 124-131.
43. Shine, R. (1989). Ecological causes for the evolution of sexual dimorphism: a review of the evidence. Q. Rev. Biol. 64: 419-461.
44. Slatkin, M. (1989). Ecological causes of sexual dimorphism. Evolution 38: 622-630.
45. Vollrath, F. (1980). Why are some spider males small? A discussion including observations on Nephila clavipes. In Proceedings of the 8th International Congress of Arachnology: 165-169. Gruber, J. (Ed.). Vienna: Verlag Ebermann.
46. Vollrath, F. & Parker, G. A. (1992). Sexual dimorphism and distorted sex ratios in spiders. Nature (Lond.) 360: 156-159.