Male-male combats in a polymorphic lizard: Residency and size, but not color, affect fighting rules and contest outcome

Aggressive Behavior

Volumn 35, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 274-283

  Sacchi, Roberto ^a   Pupin, Fabio ^a   Gentilli, Augusto ^a   Rubolini, Diego ^b   Scali, Stefano ^c   Fasola, Mauro ^a   Galeotti, Paolo ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PAVIA   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MILAN   (Italy)

^c Museo Civico di Storia Naturale   (Italy)

Author keywords

Body size; Color morph; Contest outcome; Fighting rule; Residence asymmetry; RHP

Indexed keywords

AGGRESSION; ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BODY SIZE; CONFLICT; LIZARD; MALE; NONPARAMETRIC TEST; PHYSIOLOGY; PIGMENTATION; SOCIAL DOMINANCE; TERRITORIALITY;

AGGRESSION; ANIMALS; BODY SIZE; CONFLICT (PSYCHOLOGY); HIERARCHY, SOCIAL; LIZARDS; MALE; PIGMENTATION; STATISTICS, NONPARAMETRIC; TERRITORIALITY;

EID: 67649409451     PISSN: 0096140X     EISSN: 10982337     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/ab.20305     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Ahnesjö J, Forsman A. 2003. Correlated evolution of pattern and body size in polymorphic pygmy grasshoppers, Tetrix undulata. J Evol Biol 16:1308-1318.
2. Alcock J, Huston TF. 1996.Mating system and male size in Australian hylaeine bees (Hymenoptera: Colletidae). Ethology 102:591-610.
3. Aragon P, Lopez P. 2006. Roles of male residence and relative size in the social behavior of Iberian rock lizards, Lacerta monticola. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 59:762-769.
4. Barbault R, Mou YP. 1986. A population analysis of the Common wall Lizard Podarcis muralis in Southern France. In: Rocek Z (ed.). Studies in Herpetology. Prague: Charles University, pp 513-518.
5. Barlow GW, Rogers W, Fraley N. 1986. Do Midas cichlids win through prowess or daring? It depends. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 19:1-8.
6. Baube CL. 1997. Manipulations of signalling environment affect male competitive success in three-spined sticklebacks. Anim Behav 53:819-833.
7. Carpenter GC. 1995. Modeling dominance: The influence of size, coloration and experience on dominance relations in tree lizards (Urosaurus ornatus). Herpetol Monogr 9:88-101.
8. Cheylan M. 1988. Variabilité phénotypique du Lézard des murailles Podarcis muralis sur les îles de la côte provencale, France. Rev Ecol (La Terre et la Vie) 43:287-321.
9. Crawley MJ. 1993. GLIM for Ecologists. Oxford: Blackwell Science.
10. Dufty AM. 1989. Testosterone and survival: a cost of aggressiveness? Horm Behav 23:185-193.
11. Edsman L. 1990. Territoriality and Competition in Wall lizards. Stockholm: University of Stockholm.
12. Enquist M, Leimar O. 1983. Evolution of fighting behaviour: Decision rules and assessment of relative strength. J Theor Biol 102:387-410.
13. Guilford T, Dawkins MS. 1995. What are conventional signals? Anim Behav 49:1689-1695.
14. Hack MA. 1997. The energetic costs of fighting in the house cricket, Acheta domesticus L. Behav Ecol 8:28-36.
15. Hammerstein P. 1981. The role of asymmetries in animal contests. Anim Behav 29:193-205.
16. Healey M, Uller T, Olsson J. 2007. Seeing red: Morph-specific contest success and survival rates in a colour-polymorphic agamid lizard. Anim Behav 74:337-341.
17. Holberton RL, Hanano R, Able KP. 1990. Age related dominance in dark-eyed juncos: Effects of plumage colour and prior residence. Anim Behav 40:573-579.
18. Hooper RE, Plaistow SJ, Tsubaki Y. 2006. Signal function of wing colour in a polymorphic damselfly, Mnais costalis Selys (Zygoptera: Calopterygidae). Odonatologica 35:15-22.
19. Hover EL. 1985. Differences in aggressive behavior between two throat color morphs in a lizard, Urosaurus ornatus. Copeia 1985:933-940.
20. Hsu Y, Earley RL, Wolf LL. 2006. Modulation of aggressive behaviour by fighting experience: Mechanisms and contest outcomes. Biol Rev 81:33-74.
21. Huntingford F, Turner A. 1987. Animal Conflict. New York: Chapman & Hall.
22. Hurd PL. 2006. Resource holding potential, subjective resource value, and game theoretical models of aggressiveness signalling. J Theor Biol 241:639-648.
23. Hutchings JA, Myers RA. 1994. The evolution of alternative mating strategies in variable environments. Evol Ecol 13:367-370.
24. Jablonski PG, Matyjasiak P. 1997. Chaffinch (Fringilla coelebs) epaulette display depends on the degree of exposure but not symmetry of intruder's epaulettes. Behaviour 134:1115-1121.
25. Kemp DJ, Wiklund C. 2004. Residency effects in animal contests. Proc R Soc Lond B 271:1707-1711.
26. Lange H, Leimar O. 2001. The influence of predation risk on threat display in great tits. Behav Ecol 4:375-380.
27. Lank DB, Smith CM, Hanotte O, Burke T, Cooke F. 1995. Genetic polymorphism for alternative mating behaviour in lekking male ruff Philomachus pugnax. Nature 378:59-62.
28. Lappin AK, Hamilton PS, Sullivan BK. 2006. Bite-force performance and head shape in a sexually dimorphic crevice-dwelling lizard, the common chuckwalla [Sauromalus ater (= obesus)]. Biol J Linn Soc 88:215-222.
29. Leimar O, Enquist M. 1984. Effects of asymmetries in ownerintruder conflicts. J Theor Biol 111:475-491.
30. Lopez P, Martin J. 2001. Fighting rules and rival recognition reduces cost of aggression in male lizard, Podarcis hispanica. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 49:111-116.
31. Marler CA, Moore MC. 1988. Evolutionary costs of aggression revealed by testosterone manipulations in free-living male lizards. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 23:221-260.
32. Marler CA,Walsberg G,White M, Moore MC. 1995. Increased energy expenditure due to increased territorial defense in male lizards after phenotypic manipulation. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 37:225-331.
33. Martin J, Salvador A. 1993. Tail loss reduces mating success in the Iberian rock-lizard. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 32:185-189.
34. Maynard-Smith J, Harper DGC. 1988. The evolution of aggression: Can selection generate variability? Philos Trans R Soc Lond B 319:557-570.
35. Maynard-Smith J, Harper DGC. 2003. Animal Signals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
36. Maynard-Smith J, Parker GA. 1973. The logic of animal conflict. Nature 246:15-18.
37. Maynard-Smith J, Parker GA. 1976. The logic of asymmetrical contests. Anim Behav 32:564-578.
38. McMann S. 1993. Contextual signalling and the structure of dyadic encounters in Anolis carolinensis. Anim Behav 46:657-668.
39. Mesterton-Gibbons M, Dugatkin LA. 1995. Towards a theory of dominance hierarchies: Effects of assessment, group size and variation in fighting ability. Behav Ecol 6:416-423.
40. Moretz JA. 2003. Aggression and RHP in the northern swordtail fish, Xiphosurus cortezi: The relationship between size and contest dynamics in male-male competition. Ethology 109:995-1008.
41. Olsson M. 1994. Nuptial coloration in the sand lizard, Lacerta agilis: An intra-sexually selected cue to fighting ability. Anim Behav 48:607-613.
42. Parker GA. 1974. Assessment strategy and the evolution of fighting behaviour. J Theor Biol 47:223-243.
43. Pryke SR, Griffith SC. 2006. Red dominates black: Agonistic signalling among head morphs in the colour polymorphic Gouldian finch. Proc R Soc B 273:949-957.
44. Pryke SR, Andersson S, Lawes MJ, Piper SE. 2002. Carotenoid status signalling in captive and wild red collared widowbirds: Independent effects of badge size and color. Behav Ecol 13:622-631.
45. R Development Core Team 2007. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0, URL http://www.R-project.org.
46. Sacchi R, Rubolini D, Gentilli A, Pupin F, Razzetti E, Scali S, Galeotti P, Fasola M. 2007a. Morph-specific immunity in males of the common wall lizard, Podarcis muralis. Amphibia-Reptilia 28:408-412.
47. Sacchi R, Scali S, Pupin F, Gentilli A, Galeotti P, Fasola M. 2007b. Microgeographic variation of colour morph frequency and biometry of common wall lizards. J Zool 273:389-396.
48. Sinervo B, Clobert J. 2003. Morphs, dispersal behavior, genetic similarity, and the evolution of cooperation. Science 300:1949-1951.
49. Sinervo B, Lively CM. 1996. The rock-paper-scissors game and the evolution of alternative mating strategies. Nature 380:240-243.
50. Sinervo B, Zamudio KR. 2001. The evolution of alternative reproductive strategies: Fitness differential, heritability, and genetic correlation between sexes. J Heredity 92:198-205.
51. Stamps JA, Krishnan VV. 1994 Territory acquisition in lizards: I. First encounters. Anim Behav 47:1375-1385.
52. Stamps JA, Krishnan VV. 1998. Territory acquisition in lizards: IV Obtaining high status and exclusive home ranges. Anim Behav 55:461-472.
53. Stuart-Fox DM, Johnston GR. 2005. Experience overrides colour in lizard contests. Behaviour 142:329-350.
54. Summers CH, Greeberg N. 1994. Somatic correlates of adrenergic activity during aggression in the lizard, Anolis carolinensis. Hormon Behav 28:29-40.
55. Temeles EJ. 1994. The role of neighbors in territorial system: When are they dear 'enemies'? Anim Behav 47:339-350.
56. Thompson CW, Moore MC. 1991a. Throat colour reliably signals status in male tree lizards, Urosaurus ornatus. Anim Behav 42:745-753.
57. Thompson CW, Moore MC. 1991b. Synthopic occurrence of multiple dewlap color morphs in male Tree Lizards, Urosaurus ornatus. Copeia 1991:493-503.
58. Tokarz RR. 1985. Body size as a factor determining dominance in staged encounters between male brown anoles (Anolis sagrei). Anim Behav 33:746-753.
59. Tuttle EM. 2003. Alternative reproductive strategies in the whitethroated sparrow: Behavioral and genetic evidence. Behav Ecol 14:425-432.
60. Tuttle MD, Ryan MJ. 1981. Bat predation and the evolution on frog vocalization. Science 214:677-678.
61. Vehrencamp SL, Bradbury JW, Gibson RM. 1989. The energetic cost of display in male Sage Grouse. Anim Behav 38:885-896.
62. Zamudio KR, Sinervo B. 2000. Polygyny, mate-guarding, and posthumous fertilization as alternative male mating strategies. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 97:14427-14432.
63. Zucker N, Murray L. 1996. Determinants of dominance in the tree lizard Urosaurus ornatus: The relative importance of mass, previous experience and coloration. Ethology 102:812-825.