Resource heterogeneity interacts with courtship rate to influence mating success in the wolf spider Schizocosa floridana

Animal Behaviour

Volumn 84, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 1341-1346

  Rosenthal, Malcolm F ^a   Hebets, Eileen A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA   (United States)

Author keywords

Mate choice; Multimodal signalling; Resource variability; Schizocosa floridana; Sexual selection; Trait interaction; Wolf spider

Indexed keywords

ABUNDANCE; BODY CONDITION; COURTSHIP; DIET; FOOD AVAILABILITY; HETEROGENEITY; REPRODUCTIVE SUCCESS; SEXUAL DIMORPHISM; SEXUAL SELECTION; SIGNAL; SPIDER;

ARANEAE; LYCOSIDAE; SCHIZOCOSA FLORIDANA;

EID: 84870445044     PISSN: 00033472     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2012.08.028     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Bale J.S., Masters G.J., Hodkinson I.D., Awmack C., Bezemer T.M., Brown V.K., Butterfield J., Buse A., Coulson J.C., Farrar J., et al. Herbivory in global climate change research: direct effects of rising temperature on insect herbivores. Global Change Biology 2002, 8:1-16.
2. Belovsky G.E., Slade J.B., Chase J.M. Mating strategies based on foraging ability: an experiment with grasshoppers. Behavioral Ecology 1996, 7:438-444.
3. Brown W.D. Allocation of nuptial gifts in tree crickets changes with both male and female diet. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 2011, 65:1007-1014.
4. Byers J., Hebets E., Podos J. Female mate choice based upon male motor performance. Animal Behaviour 2010, 79:771-778.
5. Clark C.J. Courtship dives of Anna's hummingbird offer insights into flight performance limits. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 2009, 276:3047-3052.
6. Clark C.J., Feo T.J. Why do Calypte hummingbirds 'sing' with both their tail and their syrinx? An apparent example of sexual sensory bias. American Naturalist 2010, 175:27-37.
7. Cotton S., Fowler K., Pomiankowski A. Do sexual ornaments demonstrate heightened condition-dependent expression as predicted by the handicap hypothesis?. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 2004, 271:771-783.
8. Droney D.C. Environmental influences on male courtship and implications for female choice in a lekking Hawaiian Drosophila. Animal Behaviour 1996, 51:821-830.
9. Droney D.C. The influence of the nutritional content of the adult male diet on testis mass, body condition and courtship vigor in a Hawaiian Drosophila. Functional Ecology 1998, 12:920-928.
10. Dussourd D.E., Harvis C.A., Meiwald J., Eisner T. Pheromonal advertisement of a nuptial gift by a male moth. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A. 1991, 88:9224-9227.
11. Fisher H.S., Rosenthal G.G. Hungry females show stronger mating preferences. Behavioral Ecology 2006, 17:979-981.
12. Foelix R. Biology of Spiders 1996, Oxford University Press, New York. 2nd edn.
13. Grether G.F., Kolluru G.R., Rodd F.H., de la Cerda J., Shimazaki K. Carotenoid availability affects the development of a colour-based mate preference and the sensory bias to which it is genetically linked. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 2005, 272:2181-2188.
14. Hebets E.A., Wesson J., Shamble P.S. Diet influences mate choice selectivity in adult female wolf spiders. Animal Behaviour 2008, 76:355-363.
15. Hebets E.A., Stafstrom J.A., Rodriguez R.A., Wilgers D.J. Enigmatic ornamentation eases male reliance on courtship performance for mating success. Animal Behaviour 2011, 81:963-972.
16. Hoefler C.D., Persons M.H., Rypstra A.L. Evolutionarily costly courtship displays in a wolf spider: a test of viability indicator theory. Behavioral Ecology 2009, 19:974-979.
17. Hunt J., Brooks R., Jennions M.D. Female mate choice as a condition-dependent life-history trait. American Naturalist 2005, 166:79-92.
18. Jakob E.M., Marshall S.D., Uetz G.W. Estimating fitness: a comparison of body condition indices. Oikos 1996, 77:61-67.
19. Kolluru G.R., Grether G.F. The effects of resource availability on alternative mating tactics in guppies (Poecilia reticulata). Behavioral Ecology 2004, 16:294-300.
20. Kotiaho J.S., Alatalo R.V., Mappes J., Nielsen M.G., Parri S., Rivero A. Energetic costs of size and sexual signaling in a wolf spider. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 1998, 265:2203-2209.
21. Kruse P.D., Toft S., Sunderland K.D. Temperature and prey capture: opposite relationships in two predator taxa. Ecological Entomology 2008, 33:305-312.
22. 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.
23. Nowicki S., Hasselquist D., Bensch S., Peters S. Nestling growth and song repertoire size in great reed warblers: evidence for song learning as an indicator mechanism in mate choice. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 2000, 267:2419-2424.
24. Ohlsson T., Smith H.G., Raberg L., Hasselquist D. Pheasant sexual ornaments reflect nutritional conditions during early growth. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 2002, 269:21-27.
25. Pearce-Higgins J.W., Dennis P., Whittingham M.J., Yalden D.J. Impacts of climate on prey abundance account for fluctuations in a population of a northern wader at the southern end of its range. Global Change Biology 2010, 16:12-23.
26. Rivero A., Alatalo R.V., Kotiaho J.S., Mappes J., Parri S. Acoustic signalling in a wolf spider: can signal characteristics predict male quality?. Animal Behaviour 2000, 60:187-194.
27. 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.
28. 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.
29. Scheuber H., Jacot A., Brinkhof M.W.G. The effect of past condition on a multicomponent sexual signal. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 2003, 270:1779-1784.
30. Shultz B.J., Lensing J.R., Wise D.H. Effects of altered precipitation and wolf spiders on the density and activity of forest-floor Collembola. Pedobiologia 2006, 50:43-50.
31. Spencer K.A., MacDougall-Shackleton S.A. Indicators of development as sexually selected traits: the developmental stress hypothesis in context. Behavioral Ecology 2011, 22:1-9.
32. Staley J.T., Hodgson C.J., Mortimer S.R., Morecroft M.D., Masters G.J., Brown V.K., Taylor M.E. Effects of summer rainfall manipulations on the abundance and vertical distribution of herbivorous soil macro-invertebrates. European Journal of Soil Biology 2007, 43:189-198.
33. Stearns S.C. The evolutionary significance of phenotypic plasticity. BioScience 1989, 39:436-445.
34. 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.
35. Taylor L.A., Clark D.L., McGraw K.J. Condition dependence of male display coloration in a jumping spider (Habronattus pyrrithrix). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 2011, 65:1133-1146.
36. 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.
37. Wedell N. Variation in nuptial gift quality in bush-crickets (Orthoptera, Tettigoniidae). Behavioral Ecology 1994, 5:418-425.
38. Wilgers D.J., Hebets E.A. Age-related female mating decisions are condition dependent in a wolf spider. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 2012, 66:29-38.