The costs of male courtship and potential benefits of male choice for large mates in Phidippus clarus (Araneae, Salticidae)

Journal of Arachnology

Volumn 36, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 210-212

  Hoefler, Chad D ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS   (United States)

^b MIAMI UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Fitness; Jumping spider; Sexual selection; Survivorship

Indexed keywords

ARANEAE; PHIDIPPUS CLARUS; SALTICIDAE;

EID: 45449116951     PISSN: 01618202     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1636/St07-08SC.1     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Altmann, J. 1997. Mate choice and intrasexual reproductive competition: contributions to reproduction that go beyond acquiring more mates. Pp. 320-333. In Feminism and Evolutionary Biology. (P.A. Gowaty, ed.). Chapman & Hall, New York.
2. Andersson, M. 1986. Evolution of condition-dependent sex ornaments and mating preferences: sexual selection based on viability differences. Evolution 40:804-816.
3. Bonduriansky, R. 2001. The evolution of male mate choice in insects: a synthesis of ideas and evidence. Biological Reviews 76:305-339.
4. Borgia, G. 1995. Bower destruction and sexual competition in the satin bowerbird (Ptilonorhyncus violaceus). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 18:91-100.
5. Cade, W.H. 1975. Acoustically orienting parasitoids: fly phonotaxis to cricket song. Science 190:1312-1313.
6. Candolin, U. 1997. Predation risk affects courtship and attractiveness of competing threespine stickleback males. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 41:81-87.
7. Clutton-Brock, T. & P. Langley. 1997. Persistent courtship reduces male and female longevity in captive tsetse flies Glossina morsitans morsitans Westwood (Diptera: Glossinidae). Behavioral Ecology 8:392-395.
8. Cordts, R. & L. Partridge. 1996. Courtship reduces longevity of male Drosophila melanogaster. Animal Behaviour 52:269-278.
9. Fisher, R.A. 1958. The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection. Second edition. Oxford University Press, New York. 291 pp.
10. Fox, C.W. & M.E. Czesak. 2000. Evolutionary ecology of progeny size in arthropods. Annual Review of Entomology 45:341-369.
11. Gwynne, D.T. 1991. Sexual competition among females: what causes courtship-role reversal? Trends in Ecology & Evolution 6:118-121.
12. Hoefler, C.D. 2007. Male mate choice and size-assortative pairing in a jumping spider. Animal Behaviour 73:943-954.
13. Hoefler, C.D. & E.M. Jakob. 2006. Jumping spiders in space: movement patterns, nest site fidelity, and the use of beacons. Animal Behaviour 71:109-116.
14. Jackson, R.R. 1981. Relationship between reproductive security and intersexual selection in a jumping spider, Phidippus johnsoni (Araneae: Salticidae). Evolution 35:601-604.
15. Jann, P. & P.I. Ward. 1999. Maternal effects and their consequences for offspring fitness in the Yellow Dung Fly. Functional Ecology 13:51-58.
16. Johnstone, R.A. 1995. Sexual selection, honest advertisement and the handicap principle: reviewing the evidence. Biological Reviews 70:1-65.
17. Kaplan, E.L. & P. Meier. 1958. Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations. Journal of the American Statistical Association 53:457-481.
18. Kirkpatrick, M. 1982. Sexual selection and the evolution of female choice. Evolution 36:1-12.
19. 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.
20. Kotiaho, J.S. 2001. Costs of sexual traits: a mismatch between theoretical considerations and empirical evidence. Biological Reviews 76:365-376.
21. Marshall, S.D. & J.L. Gittleman. 1994. Clutch size in spiders: is more better? Functional Ecology 8:118-124.
22. Moya-Larano, J. & C.W. Fox. 2006. Ejaculate size, second male size, and moderate polyandry increase female fecundity in a seed beetle. Behavioral Ecology 17:940-946.
23. Owens, I.P.F. & D.B.A. Thompson. 1994. Sex differences, sex ratios, and sex roles. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B 258:93-99.
24. Petrie, M. 1992. Peacocks with low mating success are more likely to suffer predation. Animal Behaviour 44:585-596.
25. Roach, S.H. 1988. Reproductive periods of Phidippus species (Araneae, Salticidae) in South Carolina. Journal of Arachnology 16:95-101.
26. Rypstra, A.L., C. Weig, S.E. Walker & M.H. Persons. 2003. Mutual mate assessment in wolf spiders: differences in the cues used by males and females. Ethology 109:315-325.
27. Simpson, M.R. 1995. Covariation of spider egg and clutch size: the influence of foraging and parental care. Ecology 76:795-800.
28. Skow, C.D. & E.M. Jakob. 2003. Effects of maternal body size on clutch size and egg weight in a pholcid spider (Holocnemus pluchei). Journal of Arachnology 31:305-308.
29. Wagner, W.E.J. 1996. Convergent song preferences between female field crickets and acoustically oriented parasitoid flies. Behavioral Ecology 7:279-285.
30. Zahavi, A. 1975. Mate selection - a selection for a handicap. Journal of Theoretical Biology 53:205-214.
31. Zuk, M., J.R. Rotenberry & E.W. Simmons. 1998. Calling songs of field crickets (Teleogryllus oceanicus) with and without phonotactic parasitoid infection. Evolution 52:166-171.