When should males lek? Insights from a dynamic state variable model

Behavioral Ecology

Volumn 14, Issue 6, 2003, Pages 876-886

  Isvaran, Kavita ^a   St Mary, Colette M ^a  

^a University of Florida ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

Dynamic optimization; Female preference; Lek evolution; Predation risk; Sexual harassment

Indexed keywords

AGGREGATION BEHAVIOR; EVOLUTION; LEK; MATE CHOICE; PREDATION RISK; SELECTION;

UNGULATA;

EID: 1642424265     PISSN: 10452249     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/beheco/arg066     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Alatalo RV, Höglund J, Lundberg A, Sutherland WJ, 1992. Evolution of black grouse leks: female preferences benefit males in larger leks. Behav Ecol 3:53-59.
2. Alexander RD, 1975. Natural selection and specialized chorusing behavior in acoustical insects. In: Insects: science and society (Pimental D, ed). New York: Academic Press.
3. Apollonio M, Fesla-Bianchet M, Mari F, Mattioli S, Benedetta S, 1992. To lek or not to lek: mating strategies of male fallow deer. Behav Ecol 3:25-31.
4. Balmford A, Albon S, Blakeman S. 1992. Correlates of male mating success and female choice in a lek-brecding antelope. Behav Ecol 3:112-123.
5. Balmford A, Turyaho M, 1992. Predation risk and lek-breeding in Uganda kob. Anim Behav 44:117-127.
6. Beehler BM, Foster MS, 1988. Hotshots, hotspots and female preferences in the organization of lek mating systems. Am Nat 131:203-219.
7. Beletsky LD, Orians GH, 1989. Familiar neighbors enhance breeding success in birds. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 86:7933-7936.
8. Borner M, FitzGibbon CD, Borner M, Caro TM, Lindsay WK, Collins DA, Holt ME, 1987. The decline in the Serengeti Thomson's gazelle population. Oecologia 73:32-40.
9. Bradbury J, 1981. The evolution of leks. In: Natural selection and social behavior (Alexander RD, Tinkle TW, eds). New York: Carron Press; 138-169.
10. Bradbury JW, Gibson RM, Tsai IM, 1986. Hotspots and the dispersion of leks. Anim Behav 34:1694-1709.
11. Clark C, Mangel M, 2000. Dynamic state variable models in ecology: methods and applications. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
12. Clutton-Brock TH, Deutsch JC, Nefdt RJC, 1993. The evolution of ungulate leks. Anim Behav 46:1121-1138.
13. Clutton-Brock TH, Green D, Hiraiwa-Hasegawa M, Albon SD, 1988. Passing the buck: resource defense, lek breeding and mate choice in fallow deer. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 23:281-296.
14. Clutton-Brock TH, Price O, MacColl A, 1992. Mate retention, harassment and the evolution of ungulate leks. Behav Ecol 3:234-242.
15. Cresswell W, 1994. Flocking is an effective anti-predator strategy in redshanks, Tringa totanus. Anim Behav 47:433-442.
16. Deutsch JC, 1994. Uganda kob mating success does not increase on larger leks. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 34:451-459.
17. Deutsch JC, Weeks P, 1992. Uganda kob prefer high visibility leks and territories. Behav Ecol 3:223-233.
18. Emlen ST, Oring LW, 1977. Ecology, sexual selection, and the evolution of mating systems. Science 197:215-223.
19. FitzGibbon CD, 1990. Why do hunting cheetahs prefer male gazelles? Anim Behav 40:837-845.
20. FitzGibbon CD, Lazarus J, 1995. Antipredator behavior of Serengeti ungulates: Individual differences and population consequences. In: Serengeti II: dynamics, management, and conservation of an ecosystem (Sinclair ARE, Arcese P, eds). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press; 274-296.
21. Gibson RM, Taylor CE, Jefferson DR, 1990. Lek formation by female choice: a simulation study. Behav Ecol 1:36-42.
22. Gosling LM, 1986. The evolution of mating strategies in male antelopes. In: Ecological aspects of social evolution (Rubenstein DI, Wrangham RW, eds). Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press; 244-281.
23. Gosling LM, Petrie M, 1990. Lekking in topi: a consequence of satellite behaviour by small males at hotspots. Anim Behav 40: 272-287.
24. Höglund J, Alatalo, RV, 1995. Leks. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
25. Höglund J, Montgomerie R, Widemo F, 1993. Costs and consequences of variation in the size of ruff leks. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 32:31-39.
26. Houston Al, McNamara JM, 1999. Models of adaptive behaviour. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
27. Isvaran K, Jhala YV, 2000. Variation in lekking costs in blackbuck (Antilope cervicapra): relationship to lek-territory location and female mating patterns. Behaviour 137:547-563.
28. Jarman PJ, 1974. The social organization of antelope in relation to their ecology. Behaviour 48:215-267.
29. Jhala YV, 1993, Predation on blackbuck by wolves in Velavadar National Park, Gujarat, India. Conserv Biol 7:874-881.
30. Koivisto I, 1965, Behavior of the black grouse, Lyrurus telrix, during spring display. Finn Game Res 26:1-60.
31. Kokko H, 1997. The lekking game: can female choice explain aggregated male displays? J Theor Biol 187:57-64.
32. Lank DB, Smith CM, 1992. Females prefer larger leks: field experiments with ruffs (Philomachus pugnax). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 30:323-329.
33. Mangel M, Clark C, 1988. Dynamic modeling in behavioral ecology. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
34. Nefdt RJC, 1995. Disruption of matings, harassment and lek-breeding in Kafue lechwe amelope. Anim Behav 49:219-229.
35. Nefdt RJC, Thirgood SJ, 1997. Lekking, resource defense, and harassment in two subspecies of lechwe antelope. Behav Ecol 8:1-9.
36. Stillman R, Chitton-Brock TH, Sutherland WJ, 1993. Black holes, mate retention and the evolution of ungulate leks. Behav Ecol 4:1-6.
37. Stillman R, Deutsch JC, Clutton-Brock TH, Sutherland WJ, 1996. Black hole models of ungulate lek size and distribution. Anim Behav 52:891-902.
38. Trail PW, 1987. Predation and anti-predator behavior at Guianan cock-of-the-rock leks. Auk 104:496-507.
39. Wegge P, Rolstad J, 1986. Size and spacing of capercaillie leks in relation to social behavior and habitat. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 19:401-408.
40. Widemo F, Owens IPF, 1995. Lek size, male mating skew and the evolution of lekking. Nature 373:148-151.