Seismic signaling is crucial for female mate choice in a multimodal signaling wolf spider

Ethology

Volumn 118, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 387-397

  Wilgers, Dustin J ^a   Hebets, Eileen A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COURTSHIP; DETECTION METHOD; FEMALE; MATE CHOICE; SEISMICITY; SIGNALING; SPIDER;

ARANEAE; LYCOSIDAE; RABIDOSA RABIDA;

EID: 84858287442     PISSN: 01791613     EISSN: 14390310     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1439-0310.2012.02023.x     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Basolo, A. L. & Trainor, B. C. 2002: The conformation of a female preference for a composite male trait in green swordtails. Anim. Behav. 63, 469-474.
2. Byers, J., Hebets, E. & Podos, J. 2010: Female mate choice based on male motor performance. Anim. Behav. 79, 771-778.
3. Candolin, U. 2003: The use of multiple cues in mate choice. Biol. Rev. 78, 575-595.
4. Devoe, R. D. 1972: Dual sensitivities of cells in wolf spider eyes at ultraviolet and visible wavelengths of light. J. Gen. Physiol. 59, 247-269.
5. Devoe, R. D., Small, R. J. W. & Zvarguli, J. E. 1969: Spectral sensitivities of wolf spider eyes. J. Gen. Physiol. 54, 1-32.
6. Elias, D. O., Mason, A. C. & Hoy, R. R. 2004: The effect of substrate on the efficacy of seismic courtship signal transmission in the jumping spider Habronattus dossenus (Araneae: Salticidae). J. Exp. Biol. 207, 4105-4110.
7. Foelix, R. 1996: Biology of Spiders, 2nd edn. Oxford Univ. Press, New York.
8. Framenau, V. W. & Hebets, E. A. 2007: A review of leg ornamentation in male wolf spiders, with the description of a new species from Australia, Artoria schizocoides (Araneae, Lycosidae). J. Arachnol. 35, 89-101.
9. Gibson, J. S. & Uetz, G. W. 2008: Seismic communication and mate choice in wolf spiders: components of male seismic signals and mating success. Anim. Behav. 75, 1253-1262.
10. Grafe, T. U. & Wanger, T. C. 2007: Multimodal signaling in male and female foot-flagging frogs Staurois guttatus (Ranidae): an alerting function of calling. Ethology 113, 772-781.
11. Hasson, O. 1991: Sexual displays as amplifiers - practical examples with an emphasis on feather decorations. Behav. Ecol. 2, 189-197.
12. Hebets, E. A. 2005: Attention-altering signal interactions in the multimodal courtship display of the wolf spider Schizocosa uetzi. Behav. Ecol. 16, 75-82.
13. Hebets, E. A. 2008: Seismic signal dominance in the multimodal courtship display of the wolf spider Schizocosa stridulans Stratton 1991. Behav. Ecol. 19, 1250-1257.
14. Hebets, E. A. & Papaj, D. R. 2005: Complex signal function: developing a framework of testable hypotheses. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 57, 197-214.
15. Hebets, E. A. & Uetz, G. W. 1999: Female responses to isolated signals from multimodal male courtship displays in the wolf spider genus Schizocosa (Araneae: Lycosidae). Anim. Behav. 57, 865-872.
16. Hebets, E. A. & Uetz, G. W. 2000: Leg ornamentation and the efficacy of courtship display in four species of wolf spider (Araneae: Lycosidae). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 47, 280-286.
17. Hebets, E. A., Cuasay, K. & Rivlin, P. K. 2006: The role of visual ornamentation in female choice of a multimodal male courtship display. Ethology 112, 1062-1070.
18. Hebets, E. A., Wesson, J. & Shamble, P. S. 2008: Diet influences mate choice selectivity in adult female wolf spiders. Anim. Behav. 76, 355-363.
19. Hebets, E. A., Stafstrom, J. A., Rodriguez, R. L. & Wilgers, D. J. 2011: Enigmatic ornamentation eases male reliance on courtship performance for mating success. Anim. Behav. 81, 963-972.
20. Hughes, M. 1996: The function of concurrent signals: visual and chemical communication in snapping shrimp. Anim. Behav. 52, 247-257.
21. Johnstone, R. A. 1996: Multiple displays in animal communication: 'backup signals' and 'multiple messages'. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B Biol. Sci. 351, 329-338.
22. Kaston, B. J. 1936: The senses involved in the courtship of some vagabond spiders. Entomol. Am. 16, 97-167.
23. Kodric-Brown, A. & Nicoletto, P. F. 2001: Female choice in the guppy (Poecilia reticulata): the interaction between male color and display. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 50, 346-351.
24. Kotiaho, J. S. 2000: Testing the assumptions of conditional handicap theory: costs and condition dependence of a sexually selected trait. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 48, 188-194.
25. Kotiaho, J., Alatalo, R. V., Mappes, J. & Parri, S. 1996: Sexual selection in a wolf spider: male drumming activity, body size, and viability. Evolution 50, 1977-1981.
26. Kuenzler, E. J. 1958: Niche relations of three species of lycosid spiders. Ecology 39, 494-500.
27. Leonard, A. S. & Hedrick, A. V. 2010: Long-distance signals influence assessment of close-range mating displays in the field cricket, Gryllus integer. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 100, 856-865.
28. Macaluso, E., Frith, C. D. & Driver, J. 2000: Modulation of human visual cortex by crossmodal spatial attention. Science 289, 1206-1208.
29. McClintock, W. J. & Uetz, G. W. 1996: Female choice and pre-existing bias: visual cues during courtship in two Schizocosa wolf spiders (Araneae: Lycosidae). Anim. Behav. 52, 167-181.
30. Møller, A. P. & Pomiankowski, A. 1993: Why have birds got multiple sexual ornaments. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 32, 167-176.
31. Moskalik, B. & Uetz, G. W. 2011: Female hunger state affects mate choice of a sexually selected trait in a wolf spider. Anim. Behav. 81, 715-722.
32. Nakagawa, S. & Cuthill, I. C. 2007: Effect size, confidence interval and statistical significance: a practical guide for biologists. Biol. Rev. 82, 591-605.
33. Partan, S. & Marler, P. 1999: Communication goes multimodal. Science 283, 1272-1273.
34. Partan, S. R. & Marler, P. 2005: Issues in the classification of multimodal communication signals. Am. Nat. 166, 231-245.
35. Patricelli, G. L., Uy, J. A. C. & Borgia, G. 2003: Multiple male traits interact: attractive bower decorations facilitate attractive behavioural displays in satin bowerbirds. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B Biol. Sci. 270, 2389-2395.
36. Persons, M. H. & Uetz, G. W. 2005: Sexual cannibalism and mate choice decisions in wolf spiders: influence of male size and secondary sexual characters. Anim. Behav. 69, 83-94.
37. Rovner, J. S. 1967: Acoustic communication in a lycosid spider (Lycosa rabida Walckenaer). Anim. Behav. 15, 273-281.
38. Rovner, J. S. 1968: An analysis of display in the lycosid spider Lycosa rabida Walckenaer. Anim. Behav. 16, 358-369.
39. Rowe, C. 1999: Receiver psychology and the evolution of multicomponent signals. Anim. Behav. 58, 921-931.
40. Rundus, A. S., Santer, R. D. & Hebets, E. A. 2010: Multimodal courtship efficacy of Schizocosa retrorsa wolf spiders: implications of an additional signal modality. Behav. Ecol. 21, 701-707.
41. Rundus, A. S., Sullivan-Beckers, L., Wilgers, D. J. & Hebets, E. A. 2011: Females are choosier in the dark: environment-dependent reliance on courtship components and its impact on fitness. Evolution 65, 268-282.
42. Scheffer, S. J., Uetz, G. W. & Stratton, G. E. 1996: Sexual selection, male morphology, and the efficacy of courtship signalling in two wolf spiders (Araneae: Lycosidae). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 38, 17-23.
43. Shamble, P. S., Wilgers, D. J., Swoboda, K. A. & Hebets, E. A. 2009: Courtship effort is a better predictor of mating success than ornamentation for male wolf spiders. Behav. Ecol. 20, 1242-1251.
44. Smith, C. L., Van Dyk, D. A., Taylor, P. W. & Evans, C. S. 2009: On the function of an enigmatic ornament: wattles increase the conspicuousness of visual displays in male fowl. Anim. Behav. 78, 1433-1440.
45. Spence, C., Nicholls, M. E. R., Gillespie, N. & Driver, J. 1998: Cross-modal links in exogenous covert spatial orienting between touch, audition, and vision. Percept. Psychophys. 60, 544-557.
46. Stratton, G. E. 2005: Evolution of ornamentation and courtship behavior in Schizocosa: Insights from a phylogeny based on morphology (Araneae, Lycosidae). J. Arachnol. 33, 347-376.
47. Stratton, G. E. & Uetz, G. W. 1981: Acoustic communication and reproductive isolation in two species of wolf spiders (Araneae: Lycosidae). Science 214, 575-576.
48. Sumby, W. H. & Pollack, I. 1954: Visual contribution to speech intelligibility in noise. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 26, 1298-1319.
49. Uetz, G. W. & Roberts, J. A. 2002: Multisensory cues and multimodal communication in spiders: insights from video/audio playback studies. Brain Behav. Evol. 59, 222-230.
50. Uetz, G. W., Papke, R. & Kilinc, B. 2002: 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. J. Arachnol. 30, 461-469.
51. Wilgers, D. J. & Hebets, E. A. 2011: Complex courtship displays facilitate male reproductive success and plasticity in signalling across variable environments. Curr. Zool. 57, 175-186.
52. Wilgers, D. J. & Hebets, E. A. 2012: Age-related female mating decisions are condition dependent in wolf spiders. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 66, 29-38.
53. Wilgers, D. J., Nicholas, A. C., Reed, D. H., Stratton, G. E. & Hebets, E. A. 2009: Condition-dependent alternative mating tactics in a sexually cannibalistic wolf spider. Behav. Ecol. 20, 891-900.