Sexual selection in Cnephasia jactatana (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) in relation to age, virginity, and body size

Annals of the Entomological Society of America

Volumn 97, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 819-824

  Jiménez Pérez, Alfredo ^a,b   Wang, Qiao ^a  

^a MASSEY UNIVERSITY   (New Zealand)

^b Ctro de Desarrollo Prod Bioticos   (Mexico)

Author keywords

Age; Antennal length; Body weight; Sexual selection; Virginity

Indexed keywords

AGE; BODY SIZE; MATE CHOICE; REPRODUCTIVE STATUS; SEXUAL SELECTION;

CNEPHASIA JACTATANA; LEPIDOPTERA; TORTRICIDAE;

EID: 4344692941     PISSN: 00138746     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1603/0013-8746(2004)097[0819:SSICJL]2.0.CO;2     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Andersson, M. 1994. Sexual selection. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
2. Alexander, R. D., D. C. Marshall, and J. R. Cooley. 1997. Evolutionary perspectives on insect mating, p. 386. In J. C. Choe and B. J. Crespi (eds.), The evolution of mating systems in insect and arachnids. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA.
3. Arnaud, L., and E. Haubruge. 1999. Mating behaviour and male mate choice in Tribolium castaneum (Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae). Behaviour 136: 67-77.
4. Bonduriansky, R., and R. J. Brooks. 1998. Male antler flies (Protopiophila litigata; Diptera: Piophilidae) are more selective than females in mate choice. Can. J. Zool. 76: 1277-1285.
5. Breuker, C. J., and P. M. Brakefield. 2002. Female choice depends on size but not symmetry of dorsal eyespot in the butterfly Bicyclus anynana, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B. 269: 1233-1239.
6. Carroll, A. L. 1994. Interactions between body-size and mating history influence the reproductive success of males of a tortricid moth, Zeiraphera canadensis. Can. J. Zool. 72: 2124-2132.
7. Conner, F. 1989. Older males have higher insemination success in a beetle. Anim. Behav. 38: 503-509.
8. Crompton, B., J. C. Thomason, and A. McLachlan. 2003. Mating in a viscous universe: the race is to the agile not to the swift. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B. 270: 1991-1995.
9. Darwin, C. R. 1859. The origin of species. John Murray, London, United Kingdom.
10. Friedländer, M. 1991. Physiology, reproduction and ecology. Spermatogenesis, pp. 149-156. In L.P.S. van der Geest and H. H. Evenhuis (eds.), World crop pest. Tortricid pests: their biology, natural enemies, and control. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
11. Foster, S. P. 1993. Neural inactivation of sex pheromone production in mated lightbrown apple moths, Epiphyas postvittana (Walker). J. Insect Behav. 39: 267-273.
12. Foster, S. P., and R. H. Ayers. 1996. Multiple mating and its effects in the lightbrown apple moth, Epiphyas postvittana (Walker). J. Insect Physiol. 42: 657-667.
13. Foster, S. P., A. J. Howard, and R. H. Ayers. 1995. Age-related changes in reproductive characters of four species of tortricid moths. NZ J. Zool. 22: 271-280.
14. Freedman, D., Pisani, R., and Purves, R. 1998. Statistics. W. W. Norton and Co., New York.
15. Howell, J. F. 1991. Reproductive biology, pp. 157-174. In L.P.S. van der Geest and H. H. Evenhuis (eds.), World crop pest. Tortricid pests: their biology, natural enemies, and control. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
16. Jennions, M. D., and M. Petrie. 1997. Variation in mate choice and mating preferences: a review of causes and consequences. Biol. Rev. Cambridge Phil. Soc. 72: 283-327.
17. Jiménez-Pérez, A., and Q. Wang. 2003. Effect of mating delay on the reproductive performance of Cnephasia jactatana (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). J. Econ. Entomol. 96: 592-598.
18. Jiménez-Pérez, A., Q. Wang, and N. Markwick. 2002. Adult activity patterns of Cnephasia jactatana Walker (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). NZ Plant Protect. 55: 374-379.
19. Jiménez-Pérez, A., Q. Wang, and N. Markwick. 2003. Remating behavior of Cnephasia jactatana Walker females (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). J. Insect Behav. 16: 797-809.
20. Kemp, D. J. 2002. Butterfly contests and flight physiology: why do older males fight harder? Behav. Ecol. 13: 456-461.
21. Lewis, S. M., and J. Iannini. 1995. Fitness consequences of differences in male mating behaviour in relation to female reproductive status in flour beetles. Anim. Behav. 50: 1157-1160.
22. Markow, T.A. 1985. A comparative investigation of the mating system of Drosophila hydei. Anim. Behav. 33: 775-781.
23. SAS Institute. 1996. PROC user's manual, 6th ed. SAS Institute, Cary, NC.
24. Steven, D. 1990. Entomology and kiwifruit, pp. 363-412. In R. Richards (ed.), Kiwifruit: science and management. New Zealand Society for Horticultural Science, Auckland, New Zealand.
25. Stokes, M., C. S. Davis, and G. G. Koch. 2000. Categorical data analysis using the SAS system. SAS Institute, Cary, NC.
26. Svensson, M. 1996. Sexual selection in moths: the role of chemical communication. Biol. Rev. Cambridge Phil. Soc. 71: 113-135.
27. Thornhill, R. and J. Alcock. 1983. The evolution of insect mating systems. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
28. van Dongen, S., E. Matthysen, E. Sprengers, and A. A. Dhondt. 1998. Mate selection by male winter moths Operophtera brumata (Lepidoptera, Geometridae): adaptive male choice or female control? Behaviour 135: 29-42.
29. Webster, R. P., and R. T. Cardé. 1982. Relationships among pheromone titre, calling and age in the omnivorous leafroller moth (Platynota stultana). J. Insect Physiol. 28: 925-933.
30. Wedell, N., and P. A. Cook. 1999. Strategic sperm allocation in the small white butterfly Pieris rapae (Lepidoptera: Pieridae). Funct. Ecol. 13: 85-93.
31. Wiklund, C., and J. Forsberg. 1991. Sexual size dimorphism in relation to female polygamy and protandry in butterflies: a comparative study of Swedish Pieridae and Satyridae. Oikos. 60: 373-381.
32. Yasui, Y. 1996. Males of a mite, Machocheles muscadomesticae, estimate a female's value on the basis of her age and reproductive status. J. Insect Behav. 9: 517-524.