Sequential analysis of aggressive interactions in the stalk-eyed fly Teleopsis dalmanni

Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

Volumn 65, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 369-379

  Egge, Alison R ^a   Brandt, Yoni ^a   Swallow, John G ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH DAKOTA   (United States)

Author keywords

Aggression; Assessment; Conflict resolution; Sequential analysis; Stalk eyed fly

Indexed keywords

AGGRESSION; BEHAVIORAL ECOLOGY; CONTEST COMPETITION; ECOLOGICAL MODELING; FITNESS; FLY; FOOD AVAILABILITY; HYPOTHESIS TESTING; INJURY; SEXUAL DIMORPHISM;

DIOPSIDAE; TELEOPSIS DALMANNI;

EID: 78651506832     PISSN: 03405443     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00265-010-1054-5     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Arnott G, Elwood RW (2009) Assessment of fighting ability in animal contests. Anim Behav 77: 991-1004.
2. Bakeman R, Gottman JM (1997) Observing interaction: an introduction to sequential analysis, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, New York.
3. Baker RH, Denniff M, Futerman P, Foweler K, Pomiankowski A, Chapman T (2003) Accessory gland size influences time to sexual maturity and mating frequency in the stalk-eyed fly, Cyrtodiopsis dalmanni. Behav Ecol 14: 607-611.
4. Blumstein DT, Daniel JC (2007) Quantifying behavior the JWatcher way. Sinauer Associates, Inc, Sunderland.
5. Blumstein DT, Daniel JC, Evans CS (2007) JWatcher. Available at http://www. jwatcher. ucla. edu/.
6. Brandt Y, Swallow JG (2009) Do elongated eye stalks of Diopsid flies facilitate rival assessment? Behav Ecol Sociobiol 63: 1243-1246.
7. Briffa M (2008) Decisions during fights in the house cricket, Acheta domesticus: mutual or self assessment of energy, weapons and size? Anim Behav 75: 1053-1062.
8. Briffa M, Elwood RW (2000) Cumulative or sequential assessment during hermit crab shell fights: effects of oxygen on decision rules. Roy Soc Biol London 264: 2445-2452.
9. Briffa M, Elwood RW (2009) Difficulties remain in distinguishing between mutual and self-assessment in animal contests. Anim Behav 77: 759-762.
10. Burkhardt D, de la Motte I (1983) How stalk-eyed flies eye stalk-eyed flies: observations and measurements of the eyes of Cyrtodiopsis whitei (Diopsidae, Diptera). J Comp Physiol 151: 407-421.
11. Castellan NJ Jr (1979) The analysis of behavior sequences. In: Cairns (ed) The analysis of social interactions: methods, issues, and illustrations. Robert B. Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates, Hillsdale, pp 81-116.
12. Chen S, Yeelin LA, Bowens NM, Huber R, Kravitz EA (2002) Fighting in fruit flies: a model system for the study of aggression. PNAS 99: 5664-5668.
13. Clutton-Brock TH, Albon SD, Gibson RM, Guinness FE (1979) The logical stag: adaptive strategies of fighting in the red deer stag (Cervus elaphus L.). Anim Behav 27: 211-225.
14. De la Motte I, Burkhardt D (1983) Portrait of an Asian stalk-eyed fly. Naturwiss 70: 451-461.
15. Dietemann V, Zheng H-Q, Hepburn C, Hepburn HR, Jin S-H (2008) Self assessment in insects: honeybee queens know their own strength. PLoS ONE 3: e1412. doi: 10. 1371/journal. pone. 0001412.
16. Emlen D (2008) The evolution of animal weapons. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 39: 387-413.
17. Enquist M (1985) Communication during aggressive interactions with particular reference to variation in choice of behaviour. Anim Behav 33(4): 1152-1161.
18. Enquist M, Leimar O (1983) Evolution of fighting behaviour: decision rules and assessment of relative strength. J Theor Biol 102: 387-410.
19. Enquist M, Leimar O, Ljungberg T, Mallner Y, Segerdahl N (1990) A test of the sequential assessment game: fighting in cichlid fish Nannacara anomala. Anim Behav 40: 1-14.
20. Gammell MP, Hardy ICW (2003) Contest duration: sizing up the opposition? Trends Ecol Evol 18(10): 491-493.
21. Geist V (1966) The evolution of horn-like organs. Behaviour 27(3/4): 175-214.
22. Gottman JM, Bakeman R (1986) Observing interaction: an introduction to sequential analysis. Cambridge University Press, New York.
23. Gottman JM, Roy AK (1990) Sequential analysis: a guide for behavioral researchers. Cambridge University Press, New York.
24. Hack MA (1997) Assessment strategies in the contests of male crickets, Acheta domesticus (L.). Anim Behav 53: 733-747.
25. Huntingford F, Turner A (1987) Animal conflict. Chapman and Hall, New York.
26. Jennings DJ, Gammell MP, Payne RJH, Hayden TJ (2005) An investigation of assessment games during fallow deer fights. Ethology 111: 511-525.
27. Kelly CD (2006) Fighting for harems: assessment strategies during male-male contests in the sexually dimorphic Wellington tree weta. Anim Behav 72: 727-736.
28. Marden JH, Waage JK (1989) Escalated damselfly territorial contests are energetic wars of attrition. Anim Behav 39(5): 954-959.
29. McAlpine DK (1979) Agonistic behavior in Achias australis (Diptera, Platystomatidae) and the significance of eyestalks. In: Otte, Alexander (eds) Sexual selection and reproductive competition in insects. Academic, New York, pp 221-230.
30. Meier R, Baker R (2002) A cladistic analysis of Diopsidae (Diptera) based on morphological and DNA sequence data. Insect Systematics and Evolution 33(3): 325-336.
31. Mesterton-Gibbons M, Marden JH, Dugatkin LA (1996) On wars of attrition without assessment. J Theor Biol 181: 65-83.
32. Morrell LJ, Backwell PRY, Metcalfe NB (2004) Fighting in fiddler crabs Uca mjoebergi: what determines duration? Anim Behav 70(3): 653-662.
33. Panhuis T, Wilkinson G (1999) Exaggerated male eye span influences contest outcome in stalk-eyed flies (Diopsidae). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 46: 221-227.
34. Payne RJH (1998) Gradually escalating fights and displays: the cumulative assessment model. Anim Behav 56: 651-662.
35. Payne RJH, Pagel M (1996) Escalation and time costs in displays of endurance. J Theor Biol 183: 185-193.
36. Payne RJH, Pagel M (1997) Why do animals repeat displays? Anim Behav 54: 109-119.
37. SAS Institute Inc. (2002-2004) SAS 9. 1. 3 help and documentation. SAS Institute Inc., Cary.
38. Slooten E (1994) Behavior of Hector's dolphin: classifying behavior by sequence analysis. J Mammal 75: 956-964.
39. Small J, Cotton S, Fowler K, Pomiankowski A (2009) Male eyespan and resource ownership affect contest outcome in the stalk-eyed fly, Teleopsis dalmanni. Anim Behav 78: 1213-1220.
40. Stuart-Fox D (2006) Testing game theory models: fighting ability and decision rules in chameleon contests. P R Soc B 273: 1555-1561.
41. Taylor PW, Elwood RW (2003) The mismeasure of animal contests. Anim Behav 65: 1195-1202.
42. Wilkinson G (1993) Artificial sexual selection alters allometry in the stalk-eyed fly Cyrtodiopsis dalmanni (Diptera: Diopsidae). Genet Res Camb 62: 213-222.
43. Wilkinson G, Dodson G (1997) Function and evolution of antlers and eye stalks in flies. In: Choe J, Crespi (eds) The evolution of mating systems in insects and arachnids. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 310-327.
44. Whitehouse MEA (1997) Experience influences male-male contests in the spider Argyrodes antipodiana (Theridiidae: Araneae). Anim Behav 53: 913-923.