Condition dependence of a multicomponent sexual signal in the field cricket Gryllus campestris

Animal Behaviour

Volumn 65, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 721-727

  Scheuber, Hannes ^a,b   Jacot, Alain ^a   Brinkhof, Martin W G ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BERN   (Switzerland)

^b Ethologische Station Hasli   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CALLING BEHAVIOR; CRICKET; MATE CHOICE; NUTRITIONAL STATUS; SEXUAL SELECTION; SIGNALING; SONG;

ANIMALIA; GRYLLIDAE; GRYLLINAE; GRYLLUS; GRYLLUS CAMPESTRIS;

EID: 0037392951     PISSN: 00033472     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1006/anbe.2003.2083     Document Type: Article

References (66)

1. Amundsen, T. & Forsgren, E. 2001. Male mate choice selects for female coloration in a fish. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A., 98, 13155-13160.
2. Andersson, M. 1994. Sexual Selection. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
3. Backwell, P. R. Y., Jennions, M. D., Christy, J. H. & Schober, U. 1995. Pillar building in the fiddler crab Uca beebei: evidence for a condition-dependent ornament. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 36, 185-192.
4. Bailey, W. J. & Haythornthwaite, S. 1998. Risk of calling by the field cricket Teleogryllus oceanicus; potential predation by Australian long-eared bats. Journal of Zoology, 214, 505-513.
5. Bateman, P. W., Gilson, L. N. & Ferguson, J. W. H. 2001. Male size and sequential mate preference in the cricket Gryllus bimaculatus. Animal Behaviour, 61, 631-637.
6. Brooks, R. & Couldridge, V. 1999. Multiple sexual ornaments coevolve with multiple mating preferences. American Naturalist, 154, 37-45.
7. Buchanan, K. L. & Catchpole, C. 1997. Female choice in the sedge warbler, Acrocephalus schoenobaenus: multiple cues from song and territory quality. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 264, 521-526.
8. Cade, W. H. 1981. Alternative male strategies: genetic differences in crickets. Science, 212, 563-564.
9. Candolin, U. 1999. The relationship between signal quality and physical condition: is sexual signalling honest in the three-spined stickleback? Animal Behaviour, 58, 1261-1267.
10. Candolin, U. & Reynolds, J. D. 2001. Sexual signalling in the European bitterling: females learn the truth by direct inspection of the resource. Behavioral Ecology, 12, 407-411.
11. Charif, R. A., Mitchel, S. & Clark, C. W. 1995. Canary 1.2 User's Manual. Ithaca, New York: Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology.
12. Darwin, C. 1871. The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex. London: J. Murray.
13. David, P., Bjorksten, T., Fowler, K. & Pomiankowski, A. 2000. Condition-dependent signalling of genetic variation in stalk-eyed flies. Nature, 406, 186-188.
14. Getty, T. 1998. Handicap signalling: when fecundity and viability do not add up. Animal Behaviour, 56, 127-130.
15. Getty, T. 2002. Signalling health versus parasites. American Naturalist, 159, 363-371.
16. Grafen, A. 1990. Biological signals as handicaps. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 144, 517-546.
17. Gray, D. A. & Cade, W. H. 2000. Sexual selection and speciation in field crickets. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A., 97, 14449-14454.
18. Hedrick, A. V. 1986. Female preferences for male calling bout duration in a field cricket. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 19, 73-77.
19. Hedrick, A. V. 1988. Female choice and the heritability of attractive male traits: an empirical study. American Naturalist, 132, 267-276.
20. Hedrick, A. & Weber, T. 1998. Variance in female responses to the fine structure of male song in the field cricket, Gryllus integer. Behavioral Ecology, 9, 582-591.
21. Hoback, W. W. & Wagner, W. E. 1997. The energetic cost of calling in the variable field cricket, Gryllus lineaticeps. Physiological Entomology, 22, 286-290.
22. Holland, B. & Rice, W. C. 1998. Chase-away sexual selection: antagonistic seduction versus resistance. Evolution, 52, 1-7.
23. Holzer, B., Jacot, A. & Brinkhof, M. W. G. In press. Condition-dependent signalling affects male sexual attractiveness in field crickets Gryllus campestris. Behavioral Ecology.
24. Iwasa, Y. & Pomiankowski, A. 1994. The evolution of mate preferences for multiple sexual ornaments. Evolution, 48, 853-867.
25. Johnstone, R. A. 1995. Sexual selection, honest advertisement and the handicap principle: reviewing the evidence. Biological Reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 70, 1-65.
26. Johnstone, R. A. 1996. Multiple displays in animal communication: 'backup signals' and 'multiple messages'. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 351, 329-338.
27. Johnstone, R. A. 1997. The evolution of animal signals. In: Behavioural Ecology. An Evolutionary Approach (Ed. by J. R. Krebs & N. B. Davies), pp. 155-178. Oxford: Blackwell Science.
28. Jones, I. L. & Hunter, F. M. 1993. Mutual sexual selection in a monogamous seabird. Nature, 362, 238-239.
29. Kotiaho, J. S. 2000. Testing the assumptions of conditional handicap theory: costs and condition dependence of a sexually selected trait. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 48, 188-194.
30. Kotiaho, J. S., Simmons, L. W. & Tomkins, J. L. 2001. Towards a resolution of the lek paradox. Nature, 410, 684-686.
31. Lessells, C. M. 1991. The evolution of life histories. In: Behavioural Ecology. An Evolutionary Approach (Ed. by J. R. Krebs & N. B. Davies), pp. 32-68. Oxford: Blackwell Science.
32. Møller, A. P. & Pomiankowski, A. 1993. Why have birds got multiple sexual ornaments? Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 32, 167-176.
33. Olvido, A. E. & Mousseau, T. A. 1995. Effect of rearing environment on calling-song plasticity in the striped ground cricket. Evolution, 49, 1271-1277.
34. Pomiankowski, A. & Iwasa, Y. 1993. Evolution of multiple sexual preferences by Fisher runaway process of sexual selection. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 253, 173-181.
35. Prestwich, K. N. 1994. The energetics of acoustic signaling in anurans and insects. American Zoologist, 34, 625-643.
36. Reinhold, K., Greenfield, M. D., Jang, Y. & Broce, A. 1998. Energetic cost of sexual attractiveness: ultrasonic advertisement in wax moths. Animal Behaviour, 55, 905-913.
37. Ritchie, M. G., Sunter, D. & Hockham, L. R. 1998. Behavioral components of sex reversal in the tettigoniid bushcricket Ephippiger ephippiger. Journal of Insect Behavior, 11, 481-491.
38. Robertson, J. G. M. 1986. Male territoriality, fighting and assessment of fighting ability in the Australian frog Uperoleia rugosa. Animal Behaviour, 34, 763-772.
39. Roff, D. A., Mousseau, T. A. & Howard, D. J. 1999. Variation in genetic architecture of calling song among populations of Allonemobius socius, A. fasciatus, and a hybrid population: drift or selection? Evolution, 53, 216-224.
40. Rosenthal, G. G., Martinez, T. Y. F., de Leon, F. J. G. & Ryan, M. J. 2001. Shared preferences by predators and females for male ornaments in swordtails. American Naturalist, 158, 146-154.
41. Rost, R. & Honegger, H. W. 1987. The timing of premating and mating behavior in a field population of the cricket Gryllus campestris L. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 21, 279-290.
42. Ryan, M. J. 1980. Female mate choice in a neotropical frog. Science, 209, 523-525.
43. Ryan, M. J. 1988. Energy, calling, and selection. American Zoologist, 28, 885-898.
44. Ryan, M. J. & Rand, A. S. 1993. Sexual selection and signal evolution: the ghost of biases past. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 340, 187-195.
45. Ryan, M. J., Tuttle, M. D. & Rand, A. S. 1982. Bat predation and sexual advertisement in a neotropical anuran. American Naturalist, 119, 136-139.
46. Ryder, J. J. & Siva-Jothy, M. T. 2000. Male calling song provides a reliable signal of immune function in a cricket. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 267, 1171-1175.
47. Ryder, J. J. & Siva-Jothy, M. T. 2001. Quantitative genetics of immune function and body size in the house cricket, Acheta domesticus. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 14, 646-654.
48. Sall, J. & Lehmann, A. 1996. JMP Start Statistics. A Guide to Statistics and Data Analysis Using JMP and JMP In Software. Belmont, Massachusetts: Duxbury Press.
49. Simmons, L. W. 1988. The calling song of the field cricket Gryllus bimaculatus (De Geer): constraints on transmission and its role in intermale competition and female choice. Animal Behaviour, 36, 380-394.
50. Simmons, L. W. 1995. Correlates of male quality in the field cricket, Gryllus campestris L.: age, size, and symmetry determine pairing success in field populations. Behavioral Ecology, 6, 376-381.
51. Simmons, L. W. & Ritchie, M. G. 1996. Symmetry in the songs of crickets. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 263, 1305-1311.
52. Simmons, L. W. & Zuk, M. 1992. Variability in call structure and pairing success of male field crickets, Gryllus bimaculatus: the effects of age, size and parasite load. Animal Behaviour, 44, 1145-1152.
53. Simmons, L. W., Taele, R. J., Maier, M., Standish, R. J., Bailey, W. J. & Withers, P. C. 1992. Some costs of reproduction for male bushcrickets, Requena verticalis (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae): allocating resources to mate attraction and nuptial feeeding. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 31, 57-62.
54. Sokal, R. R. & Rohlf, F. J. 1995. Biometry. New York: W. H. Freeman.
55. Sullivan, M. S. 1994. Mate choice as an information gathering process under a time constraint: implications for signal design. Animal Behaviour, 47, 141-151.
56. Tabachnick, B. G. & Fidell, L. S. 1983. Using Multivariate Statistics. New York: Harper & Row.
57. Wagner, W. E. Jr 1996. Convergent song preferences between female field crickets and acoustically orienting parasitoid flies. Behavioral Ecology, 7, 279-285.
58. Wagner, W. E. Jr & Hoback, W. W. 1999. Nutritional effects on male calling behaviour in the variable field cricket. Animal Behaviour, 57, 89-95.
59. Wagner, W. E. Jr & Sullivan, B. K. 1995. Sexual selection in the Gulf Coast toad, Bufo valliceps: female choice based on variable characters. Animal Behaviour, 49, 305-319.
60. Watson, P. J. & Lighton, J. R. B. 1994. Sexual selection and the energetic of copulatory courship in the Sierra dome spider, Linyphia litigiosa. Animal Behaviour, 48, 615-626.
61. Webb, K. L. & Roff, D. A. 1992. The quantitative genetics of sound production in Gryllus firmus. Animal Behaviour, 44, 823-832.
62. Wells, K. D. & Taigen, T. L. 1989. Calling energetics of a neotropical treefrog, Hyla microcephala. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 25, 13-22.
63. Williams, G. C. 1966. Natural selection, the costs of reproduction, and a refinement of Lack's principle. American Naturalist, 100, 687-690.
64. Zuk, M. 1994. Singing under pressure: phonotactic parasitoid flies in Hawaiian cricket hosts. Research and Exploration, 10, 477-480.
65. Zuk, M. & Kolluru, G. R. 1998. Exploitation of sexual signals by predators and parasitoids. Quarterly Review of Biology, 73, 415-438.
66. Zuk, M., Rotenberry, J. T. & Simmons, L. W. 1998. Calling songs of field crickets (Teleogryllus oceanicus) with and without phonotactic parasitoid infection. Evolution, 52, 166-171.