Long-distance signals influence assessment of close range mating displays in the field cricket, Gryllus integer

Biological Journal of the Linnean Society

Volumn 100, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 856-865

  Leonard, Anne S ^a   Hedrick, Ann V ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Acoustic signals; Chemical cues; Courtship; Mate choice; Multimodal signals; Multiple cues; Multiple messages; Redundant signals

Indexed keywords

ASSESSMENT METHOD; CHEMICAL CUE; COURTSHIP; CRICKET; DECISION MAKING; HYPOTHESIS TESTING; MATE CHOICE; SEXUAL SELECTION; SIGNAL;

GRYLLINAE; GRYLLUS INTEGER;

EID: 77954707923     PISSN: 00244066     EISSN: 10958312     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1095-8312.2010.01472.x     Document Type: Article

References (64)

1. Adamo SA, Hoy RR. Mating behavior of the field cricket Gryllus bimaculatus and its dependence on social and environmental cues. Animal Behaviour 1994, 47:857-868.
2. Andersson MB. Sexual selection 1994, Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press
3. Bateman PW, Gilson LN, Ferguson JWH. Male size and sequential mate preference in the cricket Gryllus bimaculatus. Animal Behaviour 2001, 61:631-637.
4. Berglund A, Bisazza A, Pilastro A. Armarments and ornaments: an evolutionary explanation of traits of dual utility. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 1996, 58:385-399.
5. Cade WH, Cade ES. Male mating success, calling and searching behaviour at high and low densities in the field cricket, Gryllus integer. Animal Behaviour 1992, 43:49-56.
6. Candolin U. The use of multiple cues in mate choice. Biological Reviews 2003, 78:575-595.
7. Candolin U, Reynolds JD. Sexual signaling in the European bitterling: females learn the truth by direct inspection of the resource. Behavioral Ecology 2001, 12:407-411.
8. Coleman SW. Taxonomic and sensory biases in the mate-choice literature: there are far too few studies of chemical and multimodal communication. Acta Ethologica 2009, 12:45-48.
9. Coleman SW, Patricelli GL, Borgia G. Variable female preferences drive complex male displays. Nature 2004, 428:742-745.
10. Day RW, Quinn GP. Comparisons of treatments after an analysis of variance in ecology. Ecological Monographs 1989, 59:433-463.
11. Fawcett TW, Johnstone RA. Optimal assessment of multiple cues. Proceedings of the Royal Society pf London Series B, Biological Sciences 2003, 270:1637-1643.
12. Gerhardt HC. Female mate choice in treefrogs: static and dynamic acoustic criteria. Animal Behaviour 1991, 42:615-635.
13. Gerhardt HC, Huber F. Acoustic communication in insects and anurans 2002, Chicago, IL, University of Chicago Press
14. Gibson RM. Female choice in sage grouse: the roles of attraction and active comparison. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 1996, 39:55-59.
15. Gray DA. Does courtship behavior contribute to species-level reproductive isolation in field crickets? Behavioral Ecology 2004, 16:201-206.
16. Gray DA, Eckhardt G. Is cricket courtship song condition dependent? Animal Behaviour 2001, 62:871-877.
17. Greenfield MD. Signalers and receivers: mechanisms and evolution of arthropod communication 2002, Oxford, Oxford University Press
18. Hack MA. The energetics of male mating strategies in field crickets (Orthoptera: Gryllinae: Gryllidae). Journal of Insect Behavior 1998, 11:853-867.
19. Hebets EA, Papaj DR. Complex signal function: developing a framework of testable hypotheses. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 2005, 57:197-214.
20. Hedrick AV. Female preferences for male calling bout duration in a field cricket. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 1986, 19:73-77.
21. Hedrick AV. Female choice and the heritability of attractive male traits: an empirical study. American Naturalist 1988, 132:267-276.
22. Hedrick AV. Crickets with extravagant mating songs compensate for predation risk with extra caution. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B, Biological Sciences 2000, 267:671-675.
23. Hedrick AV. Environmental condition-dependent effects on a heritable, preferred male trait. Animal Behaviour 2005, 70:1121-1124.
24. Hedrick AV, Weber T. Variance in female responses to the fine structure of male song in the field cricket, Gryllus integer. Behavioral Ecology 1998, 9:582-591.
25. Hissmann K. Strategies of mate finding in the European field cricket (Gryllus campestris) at different population densities: a field study. Ecological Entomology 1990, 15:281-291.
26. Jakob EM, Marshall SD, Samuel D, Uetz GW. Estimating fitness: a comparison of body condition indices. Oikos 1996, 77:62-67.
27. Johansson BG, Jones TM. The role of chemical communication in mate choice. Biological Reviews 2007, 82:265-289.
28. Johnstone RA. Multiple displays in animal communication: 'Backup signals' and 'multiple messages'. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series B, Biological Sciences 1996, 351:329-338.
29. Kortet R, Hedrick A. The scent of dominance: female field crickets use odour to predict the outcome of male competition. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 2005, 59:77-83.
30. Leonard AS, Hedrick AV. Single versus multiple cues in mate discrimination by males and females. Animal Behaviour 2009a, 77:151-159.
31. Leonard AS, Hedrick AV. Male and female crickets use different decision rules in response to mating signals. Behavioral Ecology 2009b, 20:1175-1184.
32. Loher W. Temporal organization of reproductive behavior. Cricket behavior and neurobiology 1989, 83-113. Huber FMoore TELoher W. In, eds., Ithaca, NY, Comstock Publishing Associates
33. Møller AP, Pomiankowski A. Why have birds got multiple sexual ornaments? Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 1993, 32:167-176.
34. Mullen SP, Mendelson TC, Schal C, Shaw KL. Rapid evolution of cuticular hydrocarbons in a species radiation of acoustically diverse Hawaiian crickets (Gryllidae: Trigonidiinae: Laupala). Evolution 2007, 61:223-231.
35. Nelson CM, Nolen TG. Courtship song, male agonistic encounters, and female mate choice in the house cricket, Acheta domesticus (Orthoptera: Gryllidae). Journal of Insect Behavior 1997, 10:557-570.
36. Otte D, Cade W. Role of olfaction in sexual and interspecies recognition in crickets (Acheta and Gryllus). Animal Behaviour 1976, 24:1-6.
37. Partan S, Marler P. Issues in the classification of multimodal communication signals. American Naturalist 2005, 166:231-245.
38. Patricelli GL, Uy JAC, Borgia G. Multiple male traits interact: attractive bower decorations facilitate attractive behavioural displays in satin bowerbirds. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B, Biological Sciences 2003, 270:2389-2395.
39. Rantala MJ, Kortet R. Courtship song and immune function in the field cricket Gryllus bimaculatus. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 2003, 79:503-510.
40. Rence B, Loher W. Contact chemoreceptive sex recognition in the male cricket, Teleogryllus commodus. Physiological Entomology 1977, 2:225-236.
41. Robson TE, Goldizen AW, Green DJ. The multiple signals assessed by female satin bowerbirds: could they be used to narrow down females' choices of mates? Biology Letters 2005, 1:264-267.
42. Rowe C. Receiver psychology and the evolution of multicomponent signals. Animal Behaviour 1999, 58:921-931.
43. Sakaluk SK, Ivy TM. Sequential mate choice in decorated crickets: females use a fixed internal threshold in pre- and postcopulatory choice. Animal Behaviour 2007, 74:1065-1072.
44. Scheuber H, Jacot A, Brinkhof MWG. Condition dependence of a multicomponent sexual signal in the field cricket Gryllus campestris. Animal Behaviour 2003a, 65:721-727.
45. Scheuber H, Jacot A, Brinkhof MWG. The effect of past condition on a multicomponent sexual signal. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B, Biological Sciences 2003b, 270:1779-1784.
46. Scheuber H, Jacot A, Brinkhof MWG. Female preference for multiple condition-dependent components of a sexually selected signal. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B, Biological Sciences 2004, 271:2453-2457.
47. Schluter D, Price T. Honesty, perception and population divergence in sexually selected traits. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B, Biological Sciences 1993, 253:117-122.
48. Shackleton MA, Jennions MD, Hunt J. Fighting success and attractiveness as predictors of male mating success in the black field cricket, Teleogryllus commodus: the effectiveness of no-choice tests. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 2005, 58:1-8.
49. Siegel S, Castellan NJ. Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences 1988, 2nd, edn., New York, NY, McGraw-Hill
50. Simmons LW. Male size, mating potential and lifetime reproductive success in the field cricket, Gryllus bimaculatus (DeGeer). Animal Behaviour 1988, 36:372-379.
51. Simmons LW. Kin recognition and its influence on mating preferences of the field cricket Gryllus bimaculatus (DeGeer). Animal Behaviour 1989, 38:68-77.
52. Simmons LW. Pheromonal cues for the recognition of kin by female field crickets, Gryllus bimaculatus. Animal Behaviour 1990, 40:192-195.
53. Suk HY, Choe JC. Dynamic female preference for multiple signals in Rhinogobius brunneus. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 2008, 62:945-951.
54. Thomas ML, Simmons LW. Cuticular hydrocarbons are heritable in the cricket Teleogryllus oceanicus. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 2008, 21:801-806.
55. Thomas ML, Simmons LW. Sexual selection on cuticular hydrocarbons in the Australian field cricket, Teleogryllus oceanicus. BMC Evolutionary Biology 2009, 9:162-173.
56. Tregenza T, Simmons LW, Weddell N, Zuk M. Female preference for male courtship song and its role as a signal of immune function and condition. Animal Behaviour 2006, 72:809-818.
57. Tregenza T, Wedell N. Definitive evidence for cuticular pheromones in a cricket. Animal Behaviour 1997, 54:979-984.
58. Uy JAC, Borgia G. Sexual selection drives rapid divergence in bowerbird display traits. Evolution 2000, 54:273-278.
59. Wagner WE. Measuring female mating preferences. Animal Behaviour 1998, 55:1029-1042.
60. Wagner WE, Hoback WW. Nutritional effects on male calling behaviour in the variable field cricket. Animal Behaviour 1999, 57:89-95.
61. Wagner WE, Reiser MG. The importance of calling song and courtship song in female mate choice in the variable field cricket. Animal Behaviour 2000, 59:1219-1226.
62. Walling CA, Royle NJ, Lindström J, Metcalfe NB. Do female association preferences predict the likelihood of reproduction? Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 2010, 64:541-548.
63. Zar JH. Biostatistical analysis 1984, 2nd, edn., Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall, Inc
64. Zuk M, Rotenberry JT, Tinghitella RM. Silent night: adaptive disappearance of a sexual signal in a parasitized population of field crickets. Biology Letters 2006, 2:521-524.