Enigmatic ornamentation eases male reliance on courtship performance for mating success

Animal Behaviour

Volumn 81, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 963-972

  Hebets, Eileen A ^a   Stafstrom, Jay A ^a   Rodriguez, Rafael L ^b   Wilgers, Dustin J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MILWAUKEE   (United States)

Author keywords

Amplifier; Efficacy; Intersignal interaction; Mate choice; Motor performance; Multimodal signalling; Sexual selection

Indexed keywords

COURTSHIP; EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS; EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; MATE CHOICE; MATING SUCCESS; ORNAMENTATION; PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT; PHENOTYPE; PREFERENCE BEHAVIOR; SEXUAL DIMORPHISM; SEXUAL SELECTION; SPIDER;

ARANEAE; LYCOSIDAE; SCHIZOCOSA STRIDULANS;

EID: 79953329342     PISSN: 00033472     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2011.01.023     Document Type: Article

References (80)

1. Ahtiainen J.J., Alatalo R.V., Kortet R., Rantala M.J. Sexual advertisement and immune function in an arachnid species (Lycosidae). Behavioral Ecology 2004, 15:602-606.
2. Ahtiainen J.J., Alatalo R.V., Kortet R., Rantala M.J. A trade-off between sexual signalling and immune function in a natural population of the drumming wolf spider Hygrolycosa rubrofasciata. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 2005, 18:985-991.
3. Andersson M. Sexual Selection 1994, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.
4. Backwell P.R.Y., Jennions M.D., Christy J.H., Passmore N.I. Female choice in the synchronously waving fiddler crab Uca annulipes. Ethology 1999, 105:415-421.
5. Bro-Jorgensen J. Dynamics of multiple signalling systems: animal communication in a world in flux. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 2010, 25:292-300.
6. Brodie E.D. Correlational selection for color pattern and antipredator behavior in the garter snake Thamnophis ordinoides. Evolution 1992, 46:1284-1298.
7. Byers J., Hebets E., Podos J. Female mate choice based upon male motor performance. Animal Behaviour 2010, 79:771-778.
8. Candolin U. Predation risk affects courtship and attractiveness of competing threespine stickleback males. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 1997, 41:81-87.
9. Candolin U. The use of multiple cues in mate choice. Biological Reviews 2003, 78:575-595.
10. Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences 1988, L. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, New Jersey. 2nd edn.
11. Darwin C. The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex 1871, J. Murray, London.
12. Delaney K.J., Roberts J.A., Uetz G.W. Male signaling behavior and sexual selection in a wolf spider (Araneae: Lycosidae): a test for dual functions. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 2007, 62:67-75.
13. Elias D.O., Lee N., Hebets E.A., Mason A.C. Seismic signal production in a wolf spider: parallel versus serial multicomponent signals. Journal of Experimental Biology 2006, 209:1079-1084.
14. Endler J.A. Predation, light-intensity and courtship behaviour in Poecilia reticulata (Pisces, Poeciliidae). Animal Behaviour 1987, 35:1376-1385.
15. Foelix R. Biology of Spiders 1996, Oxford University Press, New York. 2nd edn.
16. Framenau V.W., Hebets E.A. A review of leg ornamentation in male wolf spiders, with the description of a new species from Australia, Artoria schizocoides (Araneae, Lycosidae). Journal of Arachnology 2007, 35:89-101.
17. Galvan I., Sanz J.J. The cheek plumage patch is an amplifier of dominance in great tits. Biology Letters 2008, 4:12-15.
18. Gerhardt H.C., Huber F. Acoustic Communication in Insects and Anurans 2002, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
19. Gibson J.S., Uetz G.W. Seismic communication and mate choice in wolf spiders: components of male seismic signals and mating success. Animal Behaviour 2008, 75:1253-1262.
20. Hasson O. Amplifiers and the handicap principle in sexual selection: a different emphasis. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 1989, 235:383-406.
21. Hebets E. Subadult experience influences adult mate choice in an arthropod: exposed female wolf spiders prefer males of a familiar phenotype. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A. 2003, 100:13390-13395.
22. Hebets E.A. Attention-altering interaction in the multimodal courtship display of the wolf spider Schizocosa uetzi. Behavioral Ecology 2005, 16:75-82.
23. Hebets E.A. Subadult female experience does not influence species recognition in the wolf spider Schizocosa uetzi Stratton 1997. Journal of Arachnology 2007, 35:1-10.
24. Hebets E.A. Seismic signal dominance in the multimodal courtship display of the wolf spider Schizocosa stridulans Stratton 1991. Behavioral Ecology 2008, 19:1250-1257.
25. Hebets E.A., Papaj D.R. Complex signal function: developing a framework of testable hypotheses. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 2005, 57:197-214.
26. Hebets E.A., Uetz G.W. Leg ornamentation and the efficacy of courtship display in four species of wolf spider (Araneae: Lycosidae). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 2000, 47:280-286.
27. Hebets E.A., Vink C.J. Experience leads to preference: experienced females prefer brush-legged males in a population of syntopic wolf spiders. Behavioral Ecology 2007, 18:1010-1020.
28. Hebets E.A., Cuasay K., Rivlin P.K. The role of visual ornamentation in female choice of a multimodal male courtship display. Ethology 2006, 112:1062-1070.
29. Hebets E.A., Wesson J., Shamble P.S. Diet influences mate choice selectivity in adult female wolf spiders. Animal Behaviour 2008, 76:355-363.
30. Hoback W.W., Wagner W.E. The energetic cost of calling in the variable field cricket, Gryllus lineaticeps. Physiological Entomology 1997, 22:286-290.
31. Hoefler C.D. The costs of male courtship and potential benefits of male choice for large mates in Phidippus clarus (Araneae, Salticidae). Journal of Arachnology 2008, 36:210-212.
32. Hoefler C.D., Carlascio A.L., Persons M.H., Rypstra A.L. Male courtship repeatability and potential indirect genetic benefits in a wolf spider. Animal Behaviour 2009, 78:183-188.
33. Hoglund J., Kalas J.A., Fiske P. The costs of secondary sexual characters in the lekking great snipe (Gallinago media). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 1992, 30:309-315.
34. Johns J.L., Roberts J.A., Clark D.L., Uetz G.W. Love bites: male fang use during coercive mating in wolf spiders. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 2009, 64:13-18.
35. Kelly D.J., Marples N.M. The effects of novel odour and colour cues on food acceptance by the zebra finch, Taeniopygia guttata. Animal Behaviour 2004, 68:1049-1054.
36. Kodric-Brown A., Nicoletto P.F. Female choice in the guppy (Poecilia reticulata): the interaction between male color and display. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 2001, 50:346-351.
37. Koga T., Backwell P.R.Y., Jennions M.D., Christy J.H. Elevated predation risk changes mating behaviour and courtship in a fiddler crab. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 1998, 265:1385-1390.
38. Kotiaho J.S. Testing the assumptions of conditional handicap theory: costs and condition dependence of a sexually selected trait. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 2000, 48:188-194.
39. Kotiaho J., Alatalo R.V., Mappes J., Parri S., Rivero A. Male mating success and risk of predation in a wolf spider: a balance between sexual and natural selection?. Journal of Animal Ecology 1998, 67:287-291.
40. Kotiaho J.S., Alatalo R.V., Mappes J., Nielsen M.G., Parri S., Rivero A. Energetic costs of size and sexual signalling in a wolf spider. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 1998, 265:2203-2209.
41. Kulahci I.G., Dornhaus A., Papaj D.R. Multimodal signals enhance decision making in foraging bumble-bees. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 2008, 275:797-802.
42. Lande R., Arnold S. The measurement of selection on correlated characters. Evolution 1983, 37:1210-1226.
43. Lindstrom L., Ahtiainen J.J., Mappes J., Kotiaho J.S., Lyytinen A., Alatalo R.V. Negatively condition dependent predation cost of a positively condition dependent sexual signalling. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 2006, 19:649-656.
44. Lomborg J.P., Toft S. Nutritional enrichment increases courtship intensity and improves mating success in male spiders. Behavioral Ecology 2009, 20:700-708.
45. Loyau A., Saint Jalme M., Cagniant C., Sorci G. Multiple sexual advertisements honestly reflect health status in peacocks (Pavo cristatus). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 2005, 58:552-557.
46. Loyau A., Petrie M., Saint Jalme M., Sorci G. Do peahens not prefer peacocks with more elaborate trains?. Animal Behaviour 2008, 76:e5-e9.
47. McClintock W.J., Uetz G.W. Female choice and pre-existing bias: visual cues during courtship in two Schizocosa wolf spiders (Araneae: Lycosidae). Animal Behaviour 1996, 52:167-181.
48. Madsen V., Balsby T.J.S., Dabelsteen T., Osorno J.L. Bimodal signaling of a sexually selected trait: gular pouch drumming in the magnificent frigatebird. Condor 2004, 106:156-160.
49. Mappes J., Alatalo R.V., Kotiaho J., Parri S. Viability costs of condition-dependent sexual male display in a drumming wolf spider. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 1996, 263:785-789.
50. Matsumasa M., Murai M. Changes in blood glucose and lactate levels of male fiddler crabs: effects of aggression and claw waving. Animal Behaviour 2005, 69:569-577.
51. Murai M., Backwell P.R.Y. A conspicuous courtship signal in the fiddler crab Uca perplexa: female choice based on display structure. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 2006, 60:736-741.
52. Nakagawa S., Cuthill I.C. Effect size, confidence interval and statistical significance: a practical guide for biologists. Biological Reviews 2007, 82:591-605.
53. Norton S., Uetz G.W. Mating frequency in Schizocosa ocreata (Hentz) wolf spiders: evidence for a mating system with female monandry and male polygyny. Journal of Arachnology 2005, 33:16-24.
54. Parri S., Alatalo R.V., Kotiaho J.S., Mappes J., Rivero A. Sexual selection in the wolf spider Hygrolycosa rubrofasciata: female preference for drum duration and pulse rate. Behavioral Ecology 2002, 13:615-621.
55. Patricelli G.L., Uy J.A.C., Walsh G., Borgia G. Male displays adjusted to female's response: macho courtship by the satin bowerbird is tempered to avoid frightening the female. Nature 2002, 415:279-280.
56. Persons M.H., Uetz G.W. Sexual cannibalism and mate choice decisions in wolf spiders: influence of male size and secondary sexual characters. Animal Behaviour 2005, 69:83-94.
57. Petrie M., Halliday T., Sanders C. Peahens prefer peacocks with elaborate trains. Animal Behaviour 1991, 41:323-331.
58. Prestwich K.N., O'Sullivan K. Simultaneous measurement of metabolic and acoustic power and the efficiency of sound production in two mole cricket species (Orthoptera: Gryllotalpidae). Journal of Experimental Biology 2005, 208:1495-1512.
59. Rosenthal R. Meta-analytic Procedures for Social Research 1991, Sage, Newbury Park.
60. Rundus A.S., Santer R.D., Hebets E.A. Multimodal courtship efficacy of Schizocosa retrorsa wolf spiders: implications of an additional signal modality. Behavioral Ecology 2010, 21:701-707.
61. Rundus A.S., Sullivan-Beckers L., Wilgers D.J., Hebets E.A. Females are choosier in the dark: environment-dependent reliance on courtship components and its impact on fitness. Evolution 2011, 65:268-282.
62. Rutledge J.M., Miller A., Uetz G.W. Exposure to multiple sensory cues as a juvenile affects adult female mate preferences in wolf spiders. Animal Behaviour 2010, 80:419-426.
63. Rypstra A.L., Wieg C., Walker S.E., Persons M.H. Mutual mate assessment in wolf spiders: differences in the cues used by males and females. Ethology 2003, 109:315-325.
64. Saether S.A., Fiske P., Kalas J.A., Gjul J.M. Females of the lekking great snipe do not prefer males with whiter tails. Animal Behaviour 2000, 59:273-280.
65. Scheffer S.J., Uetz G.W., Stratton G.E. Sexual selection, male morphology, and the efficacy of courtship signalling in two wolf spiders (Araneae: Lycosidae). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 1996, 38:17-23.
66. Shamble P.S., Wilgers D.J., Swoboda K.A., Hebets E.A. Courtship effort is a better predictor of mating success than ornamentation for male wolf spiders. Behavioral Ecology 2009, 20:1242-1251.
67. Sinervo B., Svensson E. Correlational selection and the evolution of genomic architecture. Heredity 2002, 89:329-338.
68. Smith C.L., Van Dyk D.A., Taylor P.W., Evans C.S. On the function of an enigmatic ornament: wattles increase the conspicuousness of visual displays in male fowl. Animal Behaviour 2009, 78:1433-1440.
69. Stratton G.E. A new species of wolf spider, Schizocosa stridulans (Araneae, Lycosidae). Journal of Arachnology 1991, 19:29-39.
70. Stratton G.E. A new species of Schizocosa from the southeastern USA (Araneae, Lycosidae). Journal of Arachnology 1997, 25:84-92.
71. Stratton G.E. Evolution of ornamentation and courtship behavior in Schizocosa: insights from a phylogeny based on morphology (Araneae, Lycosidae). Journal of Arachnology 2005, 33:347-376.
72. Takahashi M., Arita H., Hiraiwa-Hasegawa M., Hasegawa T. Peahens do not prefer peacocks with more elaborate trains. Animal Behaviour 2008, 75:1209-1219.
73. Uetz G.W., Norton S. Preference for male traits in female wolf spiders varies with the choice of available males, female age, and reproductive state. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 2007, 61:631-641.
74. Uetz G.W., Roberts J.A. Multisensory cues and multimodal communication in spiders: insights from video/audio playback studies. Brain, Behavior and Evolution 2002, 59:222-230.
75. Uetz G.W., Papke R., Kilinc B. Influence of feeding regime on body size, body condition and a male secondary sexual character in Schizocosa ocreata wolf spiders (Araneae, Lycosidae): condition-dependence in a visual signaling trait. Journal of Arachnology 2002, 30:461-469.
76. Uetz G.W., Roberts J.A., Taylor P.W. Multimodal communication and mate choice in wolf spiders: female response to multimodal versus unimodal signals. Animal Behaviour 2009, 78:299-305.
77. Westneat D.F. No evidence of current sexual selection on sexually dimorphic traits in a bird with high variance in mating success. American Naturalist 2006, 167:E171-E189.
78. Wilder S.M., Rypstra A.L. Sexual size dimorphism predicts the frequency of sexual cannibalism within and among species of spiders. American Naturalist 2008, 172:431-440.
79. Wilgers D.J., Nicholas A.C., Reed D.H., Stratton G.E., Hebets E.A. Condition-dependent alternative mating tactics in a sexually cannibalistic wolf spider. Behavioral Ecology 2009, 20:891-900.
80. Zuk M., Popma S.L., Johnsen T.S. Male courtship displays, ornaments and female mate choice in captive red jungle fowl. Behaviour 1995, 132:821-836.