Should I stay or should I go? Condition- and status-dependent courtship decisions in the scorpionfly Panorpa cognata

Animal Behaviour

Volumn 78, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 491-497

  Engqvist, Leif ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BONN   (Germany)

Author keywords

courtship; female choice; nuptial gift; Panorpa cognata; precopula; scorpionfly; sexual selection

Indexed keywords

BODY MASS; COPULATION; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE BEHAVIOR; FLY; MATE CHOICE; NUPTIAL GIFT; SALIVA; SECRETION; SEXUAL SELECTION;

ANIMALIA; PANORPA COGNATA;

EID: 68349157656     PISSN: 00033472     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2009.05.021     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Aiken L.S., and West S.G. Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions (1991), Sage Publications, Newbury Park
2. Amundsen T., Forsgren E., and Hansen L.T.T. On the function of female ornaments: male bluethroats prefer colourful females. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 264 (1997) 1579-1586
3. Andersson M. Evolution of condition-dependent sex ornaments and mating preferences: sexual selection based on viability differences. Evolution 40 (1986) 804-816
4. Andersson M. Sexual Selection (1994), Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey
5. Arnqvist G., and Rowe L. Sexual Conflict (2005), Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey
6. Bakker T.C.M., Künzler R., and Mazzi D. Condition-related mate choice in sticklebacks. Nature 401 (1999) 234
7. Berglund A., and Rosenqvist G. Sex role reversal in pipefish. Advances in the Study of Behavior 32 (2003) 131-167
8. Bonduriansky R. The evolution of male mate choice in insects: a synthesis of ideas and evidence. Biological Reviews 76 (2001) 305-339
9. Bonduriansky R., and Brooks R.J. Male antler flies (Protopiophila litigata; Diptera: Piophilidae) are more selective than females in mate choice. Canadian Journal of Zoology 76 (1998) 1277-1285
10. Brooks R., and Endler J.A. Female guppies agree to differ: phenotypic and genetic variation in mate-choice behavior and the consequences for sexual selection. Evolution 55 (2001) 1644-1655
11. Brown W.D. Female remating and the intensity of female choice in black-horned tree crickets, Oecanthus nigricornis. Behavioral Ecology 8 (1997) 66-74
12. Bussière L.F., Clark A.P., and Gwynne D.T. Precopulatory choice for cues of material benefits in tree crickets. Behavioral Ecology 16 (2005) 255-259
13. Byers G.W., and Thornhill R. Biology of the Mecoptera. Annual Review of Entomology 28 (1983) 203-228
14. Chapman T., Miyatake T., Smith H.K., and Partridge L. Interactions of mating, egg production and death rates in females of the Mediterranean fruit fly, Ceratitis capitata. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 265 (1998) 1879-1894
15. Cotton S., Small J., and Pomiankowski A. Sexual selection and condition-dependent mate preferences. Current Biology 16 (2006) R755-R765
16. Dewsbury D.A. Ejaculate cost and male choice. American Naturalist 119 (1982) 601-610
17. Elwood R.W., and Dick J.T.A. The amorous Gammarus: the relationship between precopula duration and size-assortative mating in G. pulex. Animal Behaviour 39 (1990) 828-833
18. Engels S., and Sauer K.P. Resource dependent nuptial feeding in Panorpa vulgaris: an honest signal of male quality. Behavioral Ecology 17 (2006) 628-632
19. Engqvist L. The mistreatment of covariate interaction terms in linear model analyses of behavioural and evolutionary ecology studies. Animal Behaviour 70 (2005) 967-971
20. Engqvist L. Male scorpionflies assess the amount of rival sperm transferred by females' previous mates. Evolution 61 (2007) 1489-1494
21. Engqvist L. Nuptial food gifts influence female egg production in the scorpionfly Panorpa cognata. Ecological Entomology 32 (2007) 327-332
22. Engqvist L. Nuptial gift consumption influences female remating in a scorpionfly: male or female control of mating rate?. Evolutionary Ecology 21 (2007) 49-61
23. Engqvist L. Sex, food and conflicts: nutrition dependent nuptial feeding and pre-mating struggles in scorpionflies. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 61 (2007) 703-710
24. Engqvist L., and Sauer K.P. Strategic male mating effort and cryptic male choice in a scorpionfly. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 268 (2001) 729-735
25. Engqvist L., and Sauer K.P. Amorous scorpionflies: causes and consequences of the long pairing prelude of Panorpa cognata. Animal Behaviour 63 (2002) 667-675
26. Engqvist L., and Sauer K.P. A life history perspective on strategic mating effort in male scorpionflies. Behavioral Ecology 13 (2002) 632-636
27. Engqvist L., and Sauer K.P. Determinants of sperm transfer in the scorpionfly Panorpa cognata: male variation, female condition and copulation duration. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 16 (2003) 1196-1204
28. Engqvist L., and Sauer K.P. Influence of nutrition on courtship and mating in the scorpionfly Panorpa cognata. Ethology 109 (2003) 911-928
29. Engqvist L., Dekomien G., Lippmann T., Epplen J.T., and Sauer K.P. Sperm transfer and paternity in the scorpionfly Panorpa cognata: large variance in traits favoured by postcopulatory episodes of sexual selection. Evolutionary Ecology 21 (2007) 801-816
30. Fox G.A. Failure-time analysis: emergence, flowering, survivorship, and other waiting times. In: Scheiner S.M., and Gurevitch J. (Eds). Design and Analysis of Ecological Experiments (2001), Oxford University Press, Oxford 253-289
31. Grafen A., and Ridley M. A model of mate guarding. Journal of Theoretical Biology 102 (1983) 549-567
32. Gwynne D.T. Sexual conflict over nuptial gifts in insects. Annual Review of Entomology 53 (2008) 83-101
33. Hunt J., Brooks R., and Jennions M.D. Female mate choice as a condition-dependent life-history trait. American Naturalist 166 (2005) 79-92
34. Jennions M.D., and Petrie M. Variation in mate choice and mating preferences: a review of causes and consequences. Biological Reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 72 (1997) 283-327
35. Johnstone R.A. Sexual selection, honest advertisement and the handicap principle: reviewing the evidence. Biological Reviews 70 (1995) 1-65
36. Johnstone R.A., Reynolds J.A., and Deutsch J.C. Mutual mate choice and sex differences in choosiness. Evolution 50 (1996) 1382-1391
37. Jones I.L., and Hunter F.M. Mutual sexual selection in a monogamous seabird. Nature 362 (1993) 238-239
38. Jormalainen V. Precopulatory mate guarding in crustaceans: male competitive strategy and intersexual conflict. Quarterly Review of Biology 73 (1998) 275-304
39. Kock D., Ruther J., and Sauer K.P. A male sex pheromone in a scorpionfly. Journal of Chemical Ecology 33 (2007) 1249-1256
40. Kraak S.B.M., and Bakker T.C.M. Mutual mate choice in sticklebacks: attractive males choose big females, which lay big eggs. Animal Behaviour 56 (1998) 859-866
41. Lehmann G.U.C., and Lehmann A.W. Bushcricket song as a clue for spermatophore size?. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 62 (2008) 569-578
42. Leopold R.A. The role of male accessory glands in insect reproduction. Annual Review of Entomology 21 (1976) 199-221
43. Milinski M., and Bakker T.C.M. Costs influence sequential mate choice in sticklebacks, Gasterosteus aculeatus. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 250 (1992) 229-233
44. Parker G.A. Courtship persistence and female-guarding as male time investment strategies. Behaviour 48 (1974) 157-184
45. Parker G.A., and Simmons L.W. Nuptial feeding in insects: theoretical models of male and female interests. Ethology 82 (1989) 3-26
46. Proctor H.C. Indirect sperm transfer in arthropods: behavioral and evolutionary trends. Annual Review of Entomology 43 (1998) 153-174
47. R Development Core Team. R: a Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (2008), R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna
48. Real L. Search theory and mate choice. I. Models of single-sex discrimination. American Naturalist 136 (1990) 376-404
49. Reinhold K., Reinhold K., and Jacoby K.J. Dissecting the repeatability of female choice in the grasshopper Chorthippus biguttulus. Animal Behaviour 64 (2002) 245-250
50. Rowe L., and Houle D. The lek paradox and the capture of genetic variance by condition dependent traits. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 263 (1996) 1415-1421
51. Sauer K.P. Zur Monotopbindung einheimischer Arten der Gattung Panorpa (Mecoptera) nach Untersuchungen im Freiland und im Laboratorium. Zoologische Jahrbücher: Abteilung für Systematik, Ökologie und Geographie der Tiere 97 (1970) 201-284
52. Sauer K.P. The adaptive significance of genetic variability of photoperiodic response in Panorpa vulgaris. Zoologische Jahrbücher: Abteilung für Systematik, Ökologie und Geographie der Tiere 104 (1977) 489-538
53. Schaller F. Indirect sperm transfer by soil arthropods. Annual Review of Entomology 16 (1971) 407-446
54. Simmons L.W., and Gwynne D.T. The refractory period of female katydids (Orthoptera: Tettigonidae): sexual conflict over the remating interval?. Behavioral Ecology 2 (1991) 276-282
55. Simmons L.W., Llorens T., Schinzig M., Hosken D., and Craig M. Sperm competition selects for male mate choice and protandry in the bushcricket, Requena verticalis (Orthoptera: Tettigonidae). Animal Behaviour 47 (1994) 117-122
56. Stockley P. Sexual conflict resulting from adaptations to sperm competition. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 12 (1997) 154-159
57. Svärd L., and Wiklund C. Prolonged mating in the monarch butterfly Danaus plexippus and nightfall as a cue for sperm transfer. Oikos 52 (1988) 351-354
58. Therneau T.M., and Grambsch P.M. Modeling Survival Data: Extending the Cox Model (2004), Springer, New York
59. Thornhill R. Male pair-formation pheromones in Panorpa scorpionflies (Mecoptera: Panorpidae). Environmental Entomology 8 (1979) 886-888
60. Thornhill R., and Sauer K.P. Genetic sire effects on the fighting ability of sons and daughters and mating success of sons in a scorpionfly. Animal Behaviour 43 (1992) 255-264
61. Watson P.J. Multiple paternity and first mate sperm precedence in the sierra dome spider Linyphia litigosa (Linyphiidae). Animal Behaviour 41 (1991) 135-148
62. Wedell N. Female receptivity in butterflies and moths. Journal of Experimental Biology 208 (2005) 3433-3440
63. Wedell N., Gage M.J.G., and Parker G.A. Sperm competition, male prudence and sperm-limited females. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 17 (2002) 313-320