Female agreement over male attractiveness is not affected by cost of mating with experienced males

Behavioral Ecology

Volumn 19, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 854-859

  Edvardsson, Martin ^a   Hunt, John ^a   Moore, Patricia J ^a   Moore, Allen J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EXETER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Agreement; Cockroach; Female reproduction; Male attractiveness; Male mating history; Mate choice; Nauphoeta cinerea

Indexed keywords

COCKROACH; LIFE HISTORY; MATE ATTRACTION; MATE CHOICE; PREFERENCE BEHAVIOR; PREGNANCY; REPRODUCTIVE COST; SEXUAL SELECTION;

ANIMALIA; BLATTARIA; NAUPHOETA CINEREA;

EID: 47649087959     PISSN: 10452249     EISSN: 14657279     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/beheco/arn047     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Andersson M. 1994. Sexual selection. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press.
2. Andersson M, Simmons LW. 2006. Sexual selection and mate choice. Trends Ecol Evol. 21:296-302.
3. e. Biol Conserv. 95:303-315.
4. Arnqvist G, Rowe L. 2005. Sexual conflict. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press.
5. Bakker TCM. 1993. Positive genetic correlation between female preference and preferred male ornaments in sticklebacks. Nature. 363:255-257.
6. Bateman PW, Gilson LN, Ferguson JWA. 2000. Male size and sequential mate preference in the cricket Gryllus bimaculatus. Anim Behav. 61:631-637.
7. Becker WA. 1984. Manual of quantitative genetics. Pullman (WA): Academic Enterprises.
8. Boake CRB. 1989. Repeatability: its role in evolutionary studies of mating behaviour. Evol Ecol. 3:173-182.
9. Brooks R, Kemp DJ. 2001. Can older males deliver the good genes? Trends Ecol Evol. 16:308-313.
10. Chapman T, Liddle LF, Kalb JM, Wolfner MF, Partridge L. 1995. Cost of mating in Drosophila melanogaster is mediated by male accessory gland products. Nature. 373:241-244.
11. Clark DC, DeBano SJ, Moore AJ. 1997. The influence of environmental quality on sexual selection in Nauphoeta cinerea (Dictyoptera: Blaberidae). Behav Ecol. 8:46-53.
12. Corley LS, Blankenship JR, Moore AJ. 2001. Genetic variation and asexual reproduction in the facultatively parthenogenetic cockroach, Nauphoeta cinerea: implications for the evolution of sex. J Evol Biol. 14:68-74.
13. Everaerts C, Fenaux-Benderitter F, Farine JP, Brossut R. 1997. Male dominant/subordinate relationship, cuticular profiles and sex pheromones in Nauphoeta cinerea (Dictyoptera, Blaberidae). Insect Soc. 44:277-287.
14. Fisher HS, Rosenthal GG. 2006. Female swordtail fish use chemical cues to select well-fed males. Anim Behav. 72:721-725.
15. Forstmeier W, Birkhead TR. 2004. Repeatability of mate choice in the zebra finch: consistency within and between females. Anim Behav. 68:1017-1028.
16. Fowler K, Partridge L. 1989. A cost of mating in fruit flies. Nature. 338:760-761.
17. Godin JJ, Dugatkin LA. 1995. Variability and repeatability of female mating preference in the guppy. Anim Behav. 49:1427-1433.
18. Gray DA. 1999. Intrinsic factors affecting female choice in house crickets: time costs, female age, nutritional condition, body size and size related reproductive investment. J Insect Behav. 12:691-700.
19. Harris WE, Moore PJ. 2005. Female mate preference and sexual conflict: females prefer males that have had fewer consorts. Am Nat. 165:S64-S71.
20. Hunt J, Brooks R, Jennions MD. 2005. Female mate choice as a condition-dependent life-history trait. Am Nat. 166:79-92.
21. Ivy TM, Weddle CB, Sakaluk SK. 2005. Females use self-referent cues to avoid mating with previous mates. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 272:2475-2478.
22. Jennions MD, Petrie M. 1997. Variation in mate choice and mating preferences: a review of causes and consequences. Biol Rev. 72:283-327.
23. Johnsen TS, Zuk M. 1995. Repeatability of mate choice in female red jungle fowl. Behav Ecol. 7:243-246.
24. Kirkpatrick M, Ryan MJ. 1991. The paradox of the lek and the evolution of female mating preferences. Nature. 350:33-38.
25. Knell RJ. 1999. Sexually transmitted disease and parasite mediated sexual selection. Evolution. 53:957-961.
26. Kodric-Brown A, Nicoletto PF. 1997. Repeatability of female choice in the guppy: response to live and videotaped males. Anim Behav. 54:369-376.
27. Kokko H, Brooks R, Jennions MD, Morely J. 2002. The evolution of mate choice and mating biases. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 270:653-664.
28. Ligon JD, Zwartjes PW. 1995. Female red junglefowl choose to mate with multiple males. Anim Behav. 49:127-135.
29. Mays HL Jr, Hill GE. 2004. Choosing mates: good genes versus genes that are a good fit. Trends Ecol Evol. 19:554-559.
30. Montrose VT, Harris WE, Moore PJ. 2004. Sexual conflict and cooperation under naturally occurring male enforced monogamy. J Evol Biol. 17:443-452.
31. Moore AJ. 1988. Female preferences, male social status, and sexual selection in Nauphoeta cinerea. Anim Behav. 36:303-305.
32. Moore AJ. 1990. Sexual selection and the genetics of pheromonally mediated behavior in Nauphoeta cinerea. Entomol Gen. 15:133-147.
33. Moore AJ. 1997. The evolution of social signals: morphological, functional and genetic integration of the sex pheromone in Nauphoeta cinerea. Evolution. 51:1920-1928.
34. Moore AJ, Gowaty PA, Moore PJ. 2003. Females avoid manipulative males and live longer. J Evol Biol. 16:523-530.
35. Moore AJ, Gowaty PA, Wallin WG, Moore PJ. 2001. Sexual conflict and the evolution of female mate choice and male social dominance. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 268:517-523.
36. Moore AJ, Moore PJ. 1988. Female strategy during mate choice: threshold assessment. Evolution. 42:387-391.
37. Moore AJ, Moore PJ. 1999. Balancing sexual selection through opposing mate choice and male competition. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 266:711-716.
38. Moore AJ, Reagan NJ, Haynes KF. 1995. Conditional signalling strategies: effects of ontogeny, social experience and social status on the pheromonal signal of male cockroaches. Anim Behav. 50:191-202.
39. Moore PJ, Moore AJ. 2001. Reproductive aging and mating: the ticking of the biological clock in female cockroaches. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 98:9171-9176.
40. Pitcher TE, Neff BD, Rodd FH, Rowe L. 2003. Multiple mating and sequential mate choice in guppies: female trade-up. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 270:1623-1629.
41. Preston BT, Stevenson IR, Pemberton JM, Wilson K. 2001. Dominant males lose out by sperm depletion. Nature. 409:681-682.
42. Quader S. 2005. Mate choice and its implications for conservation and management. Curr Sci. 89:1220-1229.
43. Quinn G, Keough M. 2002. Experimental design and data analysis for biologists. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press.
44. Roth LM. 1964. Control of reproduction in female cockroaches with special reference to Nauphoeta cinerea. I. First pre-oviposition period. J Insect Physiol. 10:915-945.
45. Ryan MJ, Perrill SA, Wilczynski W. 1992. Auditory tuning and call frequency predict population-based mating preferences in the cricket frog, Acris crepitans. Am Nat. 139:1370-1383.
46. Shuster SM, Wade MJ. 2003. Mating systems and strategies. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press.
47. Thrall PH, Antonovics J, Dobson AP. 2000. Sexually transmitted diseases in polygynous mating systems: prevalence and impact on reproductive success. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 267:1555-1563.
48. Torres-Vila LM, Jennions MD. 2005. Male mating history and female fecundity in the Lepidoptera: do male virgins make better partners? Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 57:318-326.
49. Tregenza T, Wedell N. 2000. Genetic compatibility, mate choice and patterns of parentage. Mol Ecol. 9:1013-1027.
50. Wagner WE Jr, Murray AM, Cade WH. 1995. Phenotypic variation in the mating preferences of female field crickets, Gryllus integer. Anim Behav. 49:1269-1281.
51. Wedell N, Ritchie MG. 2004. Male age, mating status and nuptial gift quality in a bushcricket. Anim Behav. 67:1059-1065.
52. Widemo F, Sæther S-A. 1999. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder: causes and consequences of variation in mating preferences. Trends Ecol Evol. 14:26-31.
53. Wyatt TD. 2002. Pheromones and animal behaviour: communication by taste and smell. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press.