Nutritional enrichment increases courtship intensity and improves mating success in male spiders

Behavioral Ecology

Volumn 20, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 700-708

  Lomborg, Johannes Peter ^a   Toft, Søren ^a  

^a AARHUS UNIVERSITY   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Araneae; Condition dependence; Courtship; Lycosidae; Nutrient balance; Nutrition; Pardosa prativaga; Sexual selection; Wolf spider

Indexed keywords

COURTSHIP; MATING SUCCESS; NUTRIENT ENRICHMENT; NUTRITIONAL STATUS; SEXUAL SELECTION; SPIDER;

ANIMALIA; ARANEAE; LYCOSIDAE; PARDOSA PRATIVAGA;

EID: 67651121748     PISSN: 10452249     EISSN: 14657279     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/beheco/arp044     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Andersson M. 1994. Sexual selection. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press.
2. Austad SN. 1984. Evolution of sperm priority patterns in spiders. In: Smith RL, editor. Sperm competition and the evolution of mating systems. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press. p. 223-249.
3. Bertram SM, Schade JD, Elser JJ. 2006. Signalling and phosphorous: correlations between mate signalling effort and body elemental composition in crickets. Anim Behav. 72:899-907.
4. Cotton S, Fowler K, Pomiankowski A. 2004. Do sexual ornaments demonstrate heightened condition-dependent expression as predicted by the handicap hypothesis? Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 271:771-783.
5. Delaney KJ, Roberts AJ, Uetz GW. 2007. Male signaling behavior and sexual selection in a wolf spider (Araneae: Lycosidae): a test for dual functions. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 62:67-75.
6. Den Hollander J, Dijkstra H, Alleman H, Vlijm L. 1973. Courtship behaviour as species barrier in the Pardosa pullata group (Araneae, Lycosidae). Tijdschr Entomol. 116:1-22.
7. Elgar MA. 1998. Sperm competition and sexual selection in spiders and other arachnids. In: Birkhead TR, Møller AP, editors. Sperm competition and sexual selection. San Diego (CA): Academic Press. p. 307-339.
8. FaganWF,DennoRF. 2004. Stoichiometry of actual vs. potential predatorprey interactions: insights into nitrogen limitation for arthropod predators. Ecol Lett. 7:876-883.
9. Fagan WF, Seimann E, Mitter C, Denno RF, Huberty AF, Woods HA, Elser JJ. 2002. Nitrogen in insects: implications for trophic complexity and species diversification. Am Nat. 160:784-802.
10. Fisher HS, Rosenthal GG. 2006. Female swordtail fish use chemical cues to select well-fed mates. Anim Behav. 72:721-725.
11. Foelix RF. 1996. Biology of spiders. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press.
12. García-Berthou E. 2001. On the misuse of residuals in ecology: testing regression residuals vs. the analysis of covariance. J Anim Ecol. 70:708-711.
13. Grafen A. 1990. Biological signals as handicaps. J Theor Biol. 144: 517-546.
14. Hebets EA, Uetz GW. 2000. Leg ornamentation and the efficacy of courtship display in four species of wolf spider (Araneae: Lycosidae). Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 47:280-286.
15. Hebets EA, Wesson J, Shamble PS. 2008. Diet influences mate choice selectivity in adult female wolf spiders. Anim Behav. 76:355-363.
16. Hill GE, Montgomerie R. 1994. Plumage colour signals nutritional condition in the house finch. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 258: 47-52.
17. Hoefler CD. 2008. The costs of male courtship and potential benefits of male choice for large mates in Phidippus clarus. J Arachnol. 36: 210-212.
18. Hunt J, Brooks R, Jennions MD, Smith MJ, Bentsen CL, Bussiere LF. 2004. High-quality male field crickets invest heavily in sexual display but die young. Nature. 432:1024-1027.
19. Jakob EM, Marshall SD, Uetz GW. 1996. Estimating fitness: a comparison of body condition indices. Oikos. 77:61-67.
20. Kaspi R, Taylor PW, Yuval B. 2000. Diet and size influence sexual advertisement and copulatory success of males in Mediterranean fruit fly leks. Ecol Entomol. 25:279-284.
21. Kodric-Brown A. 1989. Dietary carotenoids and male mating success in the guppy: an environmental component to female choice. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 25:393-401.
22. Kotiaho JS. 1999. Estimating fitness: comparison of body condition indices revisited. Oikos. 87:399-400.
23. Kotiaho JS. 2000. Testing the assumptions of conditional handicap theory: costs and condition dependence of a sexually selected trait. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 48:188-194.
24. Kotiaho JS, Alatalo RV, Mappes J, Nielsen MG, Parri S, Rivero A. 1998. Energetic costs of size and sexual signaling in a wolf spider. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 265:2203-2209.
25. Kotiaho JS, Alatalo RV, Mappes J, Parri S. 1999a. Honesty of agonistic signalling and effects of size and motivation asymmetry in contests. Acta Ethol. 2:13-21.
26. Kotiaho JS, Alatalo RV, Mappes J, Parri S. 1999b. Sexual signalling and viability in a wolf spider (Hygrolycosa rubrofasciata): measurements under laboratory and field conditions. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 46:123-128.
27. Kotiaho JS, Simmons LW, Tomkins JL. 2001. Towards a resolution of the lek paradox. Nature. 410:684-686.
28. Kronestedt T. 1979. Etologiska karaktärer vid taxonomiska studier av vargspindlar. Entomol Tidskr. 100:194-199.
29. Krzanowski WJ. 2000. Principles of multivariate analysis: a user's perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
30. Mappes J, Alatalo RV, Kotiaho J, Parri S. 1996. Viability costs of condition-dependent sexual male display in a drumming wolf spider. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 263:785-789.
31. Martin J, Lopez P. 2006. Vitamin D supplementation increases the attractiveness of males' scent for female Iberian rock lizards. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 273:2619-2624.
32. Mayntz D, Raubenheimer D, Salomon M, Toft S, Simpson SJ. 2005. Nutrient-specific foraging in invertebrate predators. Science. 307: 111-113.
33. Mayntz D, Toft S. 2001. Nutrient composition of the prey's diet affects growth and survivorship of a generalist predator. Oecologia. 127:207-213.
34. Mayntz D, Toft S, Vollrath F. 2003. Effects of prey quality and availability on the life history of a trap-building predator. Oikos. 101:631-638.
35. McGraw KJ. 2007. Dietary mineral content influences the expression of melanin-based ornamental coloration. Behav Ecol. 18:137-142.
36. Ohlsson T, Smith HG, Ra°berg L, Hasselquist D. 2001. Pheasant sexual ornaments reflect nutritional conditions during early growth. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 269:21-27.
37. Pyke DA, Thompson JN. 1986. Statistical analysis of survival and removal rate experiments. Ecology. 67:240-245.
38. Raubenheimer D, Jones SA. 2006. Nutritional imbalance in an extreme generalist omnivore: tolerance and recovery through complementary food selection. Anim Behav. 71:1253-1262.
39. Raubenheimer D, Mayntz D, Simpson SJ, Toft S. 2007. Nutrientspecific compensation following diapause in a predator: implications for intraguild predation. Ecology. 88:2598-2608.
40. Raubenheimer D, Simpson SJ. 1997. Integrative models of nutrient balancing: application to insects and vertebrates. Nutr Res Rev. 10:151-179.
41. Richter CJJ, Den Hollander J, Vlijm L. 1971. Differences in breeding and motility between Pardosa pullata (Clerck) and Pardosa prativaga(L. Koch), (Lycosidae, Araneae) in relation to habitat. Oecologia. 6:318-327.
42. Rolff J, Joop G. 2002. Estimating condition: pitfalls of using weight as a fitness correlate. Evol Ecol Res. 4:931-935.
43. Rowe L, Houle D. 1996. The lek paradox and the capture of genetic variance by condition dependent traits. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 263:1415-1421.
44. Rypstra AL, Wieg C, Walker WE, Persons MH. 2003. Mutual mate assessment in wolf spiders: differences in the cues used by males and females. Ethology. 109:315-325.
45. Simpson SJ, Raubenheimer D, Behmer ST, Whitworth A, Wright GA. 2002. A comparison of nutritional regulation in solitarious-and gregarious-phase nymphs of the desert locust Schistocerca gregaria. J Exp Biol. 205:121-129.
46. Smith HG, Ra°berg L, Ohlsson T, Granbom M, Hasselquist D. 2006. Carotenoid and protein supplementation have differential effects on pheasant ornamentation and immunity. J Evol Biol. 20: 310-319.
47. Stratton GE. 2005. Evolution of ornamentation and courtship behavior in Schizocosa: insights from a phylogeny based on morphology (Araneae: Lycosidae). J Arachnol. 33:347-376.
48. Toft S. 1999. Prey choice and spider fitness. J Arachnol. 27:301-307.
49. Uetz GW, Bischoff J, Raver J. 1992. Survivorship of wolf spiders (Lycosidae) reared on different diets. J Arachnol. 20:207-211.
50. Uetz GW, Papke R, Kilinc B. 2002. Influence of feeding regime on body size, body condition and a male secondary sexual character in Schizocosa ocreata wolf spiders (Araneae, Lycosidae): conditiondependence in a visual signalling trait. J Arachnol. 30:461-469.
51. Watson PJ, Lighton JRB. 1994. Sexual selection and the energetics of copulatory courtship in the sierra dome spider, Linyphia litigiosa. Anim Behav. 48:615-625.
52. Wilder SM, Rypstra AL. 2008. Diet quality affects mating behaviour and egg production in a wolf spider. Anim Behav. 76: 439-445.