Sequential mate encounters: Female but not male body size influences female remating behavior

Behavioral Ecology

Volumn 16, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 461-466

  Schäfer, Martin A ^a   Uhl, Gabriele ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VETERINARY MEDICINE   (Austria)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BONN   (Germany)

Author keywords

Araneae; Body size; Fecundity; Mate choice; Mate rejection; Sexual selection

Indexed keywords

BODY SIZE; MATING BEHAVIOR; SEXUAL SELECTION; SPIDER;

ARANEAE; PHOLCUS PHALANGIOIDES;

EID: 14644404362     PISSN: 10452249     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/beheco/ari013     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Andersson M, 1994. Sexual selection. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
2. Bateman PW, Gilson LN, Ferguson JWH, 2001. Male size and sequential mate preference in the cricket Gryllus bimaclatus. Anim Behav 61:631-637.
3. Bergström J, Wiklund C, Kaitala A, 2002. Natural variation in female mating frequency in a polyandrous butterfly: effects of size and age. Anim Behav 64:49-54.
4. Bensch S, Hasselquist D, 1992. Evidence for active female choice in a polygynous warbler. Anim Behav 44:310-312.
5. Blanckenhorn WU, 2000. The evolution of body size: what keeps organisms small? Q Rev Biol 75:385-407.
6. Bondurianski R, 2001. The evolution of male mate choice in insects: a synthesis of ideas and evidence. Biol Rev 76:305-339.
7. Choudhury S, Black JM, 1993. Mate-selection behaviour and sampling strategies in geese. Anim Behav 46:747-757.
8. Crespi BJ, 1989. Causes of assortative mating in arthropods. Anim Behav 38:980-1000.
9. Dale S, Amundson T, Lifjeld JT, Slagsvold T, 1990. Mate sampling behaviour of female pied flycatchers: evidence for active mate choice. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 27:87-91.
10. Dale S, Rinden H, Slagsvold T, 1992. Competition for a mate restricts mate search of female pied flycatchers. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 30:165-176.
11. Elgar MA, 1998. Sperm competition and sexual selection in spiders and other arachnids. In: Sperm competition and sexual selection (Birkhead TR, Moller AP, eds). San Diego, CA: Academic Press; 307-332.
12. Gabor CR, Halliday TR, 1997. Sequential male choice by multiple mating smooth newts: females become more choosy. Behav Ecol 8:162-166.
13. Gage MJG, 1998. Influences of sex, size, and symmetry on ejaculate expenditure in a moth. Behav Ecol 9:592-597.
14. Gibson RM, Langen TA, 1996. How do animals choose their mates? Trends Ecol Evol 11:468-470.
15. Gwynne DT, 1991. Sexual competition among females: what causes courtship-role reversal? Trends Ecol Evol 6:118-121.
16. Halliday TR, 1983. The study of mate choice. In: Mate choice (Bateson P, ed). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press; 3-22.
17. Honek A, 1993. Intraspecific variation in body size and fecundity in insects: a general relationship. Oikos 66:483-492.
18. Houde AE, 1987. Mate choice based upon naturally occurring color-pattern variation in a guppy population. Evolution 41:1-10.
19. Janetos AC, 1980. Strategies of female mate choice: a theoretical analysis. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 7:107-112.
20. Jennions MD, Petrie M, 1997. Variation in mate choice and mating preferences: a review of causes and consequences. Biol Rev 72:283-327.
21. Jennions MD, Petrie M, 2000. Why do females mate multiply? A review of the genetic benefits. Biol Rev 75:21-61.
22. Johnstone RA, 1995. Sexual selection, honest advertisement and the handicap principle: reviewing the evidence. Biol Rev 70:1-65.
23. Maklakov AA, Bilde T, Lubin Y, 2003. Vibratory courtship in a web-building spider. Signalling quality or stimulating the female? Anim Behav 66:623-630.
24. Masumoto T, 1999. Size assortative mating and reproductive success of the funnel-web spider, Agelena limbata. J Insect Behav 12:353-361.
25. Mayntz D, Toft S, 2001. Nutrient composition of the prey's diet affects growth and survivorship of a generalist predator. Oekologia 127:207-213.
26. Milinski M, Bakker TCM, 1992. Costs influence sequential mate choice in sticklebacks, Gasterosteus aculeatus. Proc R Soc Lond B 250:229-233.
27. Moore AJ, Moore PJ, 1988. Female strategy during mate choice: threshold assessment. Evolution 42:387-391.
28. Norušis MJ, 2000. SPSS 10.0. Guide to data analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
29. Parker GA, Ball MA, Stockley P, Gage MJG, 1996. Sperm competition games: assessment of sperm competition intensity by group spawner. Proc R Soc Lond B 263:1291-1297.
30. Pitcher TE, Neff BD, Roff FH, Rowe L, 2003. Multiple mating and sequential mate choice in guppies: females trade up. Proc R Soc Lond B 270:1623-1629.
31. Pomiankowski A, Iwasa Y, 1998. Runaway ornament diversity caused by Fisherian sexual selection. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 95:5106-5111.
32. Rasa OAE, 1997. Female mate assessment tactics in a subsocial desert beetle: a test of Janetos' models. Ethol Ecol Evol 9:233-240.
33. Real LA, 1990. Search theory and mate choice. I. Models of single-sex discrimination. Am Nat 136:376-404.
34. Real LA, 1991. Search theory and mate choice. II. Mutual interaction, assortative mating, and equilibrium variation in male and female fitness. Am Nat 138:901-917.
35. Riechert SE, Johns PM, 2003. Do female spiders select heavier males for the genes for behavioural aggressiveness they offer their offspring? Evolution 57:1367-1373.
36. Ringo J, 1996. Sexual receptivity in insects. Ann Rev Entomol 41:473-484.
37. Rowe L, Arnqvist G, 1996. Analyses of the causal components of assortative mating in water striders. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 38:279-286.
38. Savalli UM, Fox CW, 1998. Sexual selection and the fitness consequences of male body size in the seed beetle Stator limbatus. Anim Behav 55:473-483.
39. Schäfer MA, Hille A, Uhl G, 2001. Geographical patterns of genetic subdivision in the cellar spider Pholcus phalangioides (Aranea). Heredity 86:94-102.
40. Schäfer MA, Uhl G, 2002. Determinants of paternity success in the spider Pholcus phalangioides (Pholcidae: Araneae): the role of male and female mating behaviour. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 51:368-377.
41. Schaefer D, Uhl G, 2003. Male competition over access to females in a spider with last-male sperm precedence. Ethology 109:385-400.
42. Singer F, Riechert SE, 1995. Mating system and mating success of the desert spider Agelenopsis aperta. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 36:313-322.
43. Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ, 1995. Biometry, 3rd ed. New York: Freeman.
44. Stearns SC, 1992. The evolution of life histories. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
45. Trexler JC, Travis J, Dinep A, 1997. Variation among populations of the sailfin molly in the rate of concurrent multiple paternity and its implications for mating-system evolution. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 40:297-305.
46. Uhl G, 1994. Reproduktionsbiologie von Zitterspinnen (PhD dissertation). Freiburg i. Br.: University of Freiburg.
47. Uhl G, 1998. Mating behaviour in the cellar spider, Pholcus phalangioides, indicates sperm mixing. Anim Behav 56:1155-1159.
48. Uhl G, Huber BA, Rose W, 1995. Male pedipalp morphology and copulatory mechanism in Pholcus phalangioides (Fuesslin, 1775) (Araneae, Pholcidae). Bull Br Arachnol Soc 10:1-9.
49. Uhl G, Schmitt S, Schäfer MA, Blanckenhorn WU, 2004. Food and sex specific growth strategies in a spider. Evol Ecol Res 6:523-540.
50. Wang Q, Millar JG, 1997. Reproductive behavior of Thyanta pallidovirens (Heteroptera: Pentatomidae). Ann Entmol Soc Am 90:380-388.
51. Watson PJ, 1991. Multiple paternity and first mate sperm precedence in the sierra dome spider, Linyphia litigiosa Keyserling (Linyphiidae). Anim Behav 41:135-148.
52. Watson PJ, Arnqvist G, Stallmann RR, 1997. Sexual conflict and the energetic costs of mating and mate choice in water striders. Am Nat 151:46-58.
53. Wedell N, Gage MJG, Parker GA, 2002. Sperm competition, male prudence and sperm limited females. Trends Ecol Evol 17:313-320.
54. Zeh JA, Newcomer SD, Zeh DW, 1998. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 95:13732-13736.
55. Zuk M, Johnson K, Thornhill R, Ligon JD, 1990. Mechanisms of female choice in red jungle fowl. Evolution 44:477-485.