The conditional economics of sexual conflict

Biology Letters

Volumn 5, Issue 5, 2009, Pages 671-674

  Fricke, Claudia ^a   Perry, Jen ^b   Chapman, Tracey ^a   Rowe, Locke ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EAST ANGLIA   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

Accessory gland proteins; Nuptial gifts; Sexually antagonistic coevolution

Indexed keywords

BEETLE; COEVOLUTION; DROSOPHILA; GENETIC TRAIT; GIFT GIVING; INVERTEBRATE; MATING; NONHUMAN; NOTE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SEX DIFFERENCE; SEXUAL BEHAVIOR; SEXUAL SELECTION; SOCIAL INTERACTION;

EID: 70349292215     PISSN: 17449561     EISSN: 1744957X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1098/rsbl.2009.0433     Document Type: Note

References (27)

1. Arnqvist, G. 1992 Spatial variation in selective regimes: sexual selection in the water strider Gerris odontogaster. Evolution 46, 914-929. (doi:10.2307/2409746) (Pubitemid 23395389)
2. Arnqvist, G. & Rowe, L. 1995 Sexual conflict and arms races between the sexes: a morphological adaptation for control of mating in a female insect. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 261, 123-127. (doi:10.1098/rspb.1995.0126)
3. Arnqvist, G. & Rowe, L. 2002 Antagonistic coevolution between the sexes in a group of insects. Nature 415, 787-789. (doi:10.1038/415787a) (Pubitemid 34150499)
4. Arnqvist, G. & Rowe, L. 2005 Sexual conflict. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
5. Bonduriansky, R., Wheeler, J. & Rowe, L. 2005 Ejaculate feeding and female fitness in the sexually dimorphic fly Prochyliza xanthostoma (Diptera: Piophilidae). Anim. Behav. 69, 488-497. (doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2004.03.018) (Pubitemid 40084848)
6. Bussiere, L. F., Hunt, J., Jennions, M. D. & Brooks, R. 2006 Sexual conflict and cryptic female choice in the black field cricket, Teleogryllus commodus. Evolution 60, 792-800. (doi:10.1554/05-378.1)
7. Candolin, U. & Heuschele, J. 2008 Is sexual selection beneficial during adaptation to environmental change? Trends Ecol. Evol. 23, 446-452. (doi:10.1016/j.tree.2008.04.008)
8. Crudgington, H. S. & Siva-Jothy, M. T. 2000 Genital damage, kicking and early death: the battle of the sexes takes a sinister turn in the bean weevil. Nature 407, 855-856. (doi:10.1038/35038154)
9. Edward, D. A. & Gilburn, A. S. 2007 The effect of habitat composition on sexual conflict in the seaweed flies Coelopa frigida and C. pilipes. Anim. Behav. 74, 343-348. (doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2006.07.023)
10. Emlen, S. T. & Oring, L. W. 1977 Ecology, sexual selection, and evolution of mating systems. Science 197, 215-223. (doi:10.1126/science.327542)
11. Fricke, C., Bretman, A. & Chapman, T. 2008 Adult male nutrition and reproductive success in Drosophila melanogaster. Evolution 62, 3170-3177. (doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.2008.00515.x)
12. Fricke, C., Wigby, S., Hobbs, R. & Chapman, T. 2009 The benefits of male ejaculate sex peptide transfer in Drosophila melanogaster. J. Evol. Biol. 22, 275-286. (doi:10.1111/j.1420-9101.2008.01638.x)
13. Gwynne, D. T. 2008 Sexual conflict over nuptial gifts in insects. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 53, 83-101. (doi:10.1146/annurev.ento.53.103106.093423)
14. Kokko, H. & Rankin, D. J. 2006 Lonely hearts or sex in the city? Density-dependent effects in mating systems. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 361, 319-334. (doi:10.1098/rstb.2005.1784)
15. Parker, G. A. 1979 Sexual selection and sexual conflict. Sexual selection and reproductive competition in insects. London, UK: Academic Press.
16. Partridge, L. & Harvey, P. H. 1985 Costs of reproduction. Nature 316, 20. (doi:10.1038/316020a0)
17. Perry, J. C. & Rowe, L. 2008 Ingested spermatophores accelerate reproduction and increase mating resistance but are not a source of sexual conflict. Anim. Behav. 76, 993-1000. (doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2008.05.017)
18. Pilastro, A., Benetton, S. & Bisazza, A. 2003 Female aggregation and male competition reduce costs of sexual harassment in the mosquitofish Gambusia holbrooki. Anim. Behav. 65, 1161-1167. (doi:10.1006/anbe.2003.2118)
19. Reinhardt, K., Naylor, R. & Siva-Jothy, M. T. 2003 Reducing the cost of traumatic insemination: female bedbugs evolve a unique organ. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 270, 2371-2375. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2003.2515)
20. Reznick, D. 1992 Measuring the cost of reproduction. Trends Ecol. Evol. 7, 42-45. (doi:10.1016/0169-5347(92)90150-A)
21. Rice, W. R. 1996 Sexually antagonistic male adaptation triggered by experimental arrest of female evolution. Nature 381, 232-234. (doi:10.1038/381232a0)
22. Rönn, J., Katvala, M. & Arnqvist, G. 2007 Coevolution between harmful male genitalia and female resistance in seed beetles. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 104, 10 921-10 925. (doi:10.1073/pnas.0701170104)
23. Rowe, L. 1992 Convenience polyandry in a water strider: foraging conflicts and female control of copulation frequency and guarding duration. Anim. Behav. 44, 189-202. (doi:10.1016/0003-3472(92)90025-5)
24. Rowe, L. & Day, T. 2006 Detecting sexual conflict and sexually antagonistic coevolution. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 361, 277-285. (doi:10.1098/rstb.2005.1788)
25. Vahed, K. 2007a All that glisters is not gold: sensory bias, sexual conflict and nuptial feeding in insects and spiders. Ethology 113, 105-127. (doi:10.1111/j.1439-0310.2006.01312.x) (Pubitemid 46232992)
26. Vahed, K. 2007b Comparative evidence for a cost to males of manipulating females in bushcrickets. Behav. Ecol. 18, 499-506. (doi:10.1093/beheco/arm021)
27. Wigby, S. & Chapman, T. 2005 Sex peptide causes mating costs in female Drosophila melanogaster. Curr. Biol. 15, 316-321. (doi:10.1016/j.cub. 2005.01.051)