Variation in social and sexual behaviour in four species of aposematic seed bugs (Hemiptera: Lygaeidae): The role of toxic and non-toxic food

Behavioural Processes

Volumn 99, Issue , 2013, Pages 52-61

  Burdfield Steel, Emily R ^a   Dougherty, Liam R ^a   Smith, Lynsey A ^a   Collins, Laura A ^a   Shuker, David M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ST ANDREWS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Aggregation; Aposematism; Automimicry; Behaviour; Diet; Mate choice; Sexual selection

Indexed keywords

ADAPTATION; AGGREGATION; APOSEMATISM; EVOLUTIONARY THEORY; FOOD; INSECT; MATE CHOICE; MIMICRY; POLLUTION EXPOSURE; SEED; SEXUAL BEHAVIOR; SEXUAL SELECTION; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; TOXICITY;

ADVERTIZING; ANIMAL BEHAVIOR; ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ARTICLE; BODY HEIGHT; BODY SIZE; DIET; FEMALE; HEMIPTERA; MALE; MATE CHOICE; NONHUMAN; NYMPH; SEXUAL BEHAVIOR; SEXUAL SELECTION; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; SUNFLOWER; AGING; ANIMAL; ASCLEPIAS; BODY WEIGHT; EVOLUTION; FOOD; FOOD PREFERENCE; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOLOGY; SPECIES DIFFERENCE;

AGING; ANIMALS; ASCLEPIAS; BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION; BODY WEIGHT; DIET; FEMALE; FOOD; FOOD PREFERENCES; HELIANTHUS; HEMIPTERA; MALE; NYMPH; SEXUAL BEHAVIOR, ANIMAL; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; SPECIES SPECIFICITY;

EID: 84880406944     PISSN: 03766357     EISSN: 18728308     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2013.06.006     Document Type: Article

References (74)

1. Abushama F.T., Ahmed A.A. Food-plant preference and defense mechanism in lygaeid bug Spilostethus pandurus (Scop). Zeitschrift Fur Angew. Entomol.-J. Appl. Entomol. 1976, 80:206-213.
2. Aldrich J.R. Chemical ecology of the heteroptera. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 1988, 33:211-238.
3. Andersson B. Sexual Selection 1994, Princeton University Press.
4. Arnqvist G., Nilsson T. The evolution of polyandry: multiple mating and female fitness in insects. Anim. Behav. 2000, 60:145-164.
5. Attisano A., Moore A.J., Moore P.J. Reproduction-longevity trade-offs reflect diet, not adaptation. J. Evol. Biol. 2012, 25.
6. Barry K.L., Kokko H. Male mate choice: why sequential choice can make its evolution difficult. Anim. Behav. 2010, 80:163-169.
7. Bateson M., Healy S.D. Comparative evaluation and its implications for mate choice. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2005, 20:659-664.
8. Bateson P. Mate Choice. Mate Choice Xv+462p 1983, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England; New York, USA, Illus: XV+462P-XV+462P. P. Bateson (Ed.).
9. Bell A.M. Animal behavior: personality in the wild. Nature 2012, 491:341-342.
10. Berenbaum M.R., Miliczky E. Mantids and milkweed bugs - efficacy of aposematic colouration against invertebrate predators. Am. Midl. Nat. 1984, 111:64-68.
11. Blakley N. Life-history significance of size-triggered mertamorphosis in milkweed bugs (Oncopeltus). Ecology 1981, 62:57-64.
12. Blakley N. Life-history significance of size-triggered metamorphosis in milkweed bugs (Oncopeltus). Ecology 1981, 62:57-64.
13. Blakley N., Goodner S.R. Size-dependent timing of metamorphosis in milkweed bugs (oncopeltus) and its life-history implications. Biol. Bull. 1978, 155:499-510.
14. Bleakley B.H., Wolf J.B., Moore A.J. The quantitative genetics of social behaviour. Social Behaviour: Genes, Ecology and Evolution 2010, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. T. Szekely, A.J. Moore, J. Komdeur (Eds.).
15. Bonhag P.F., Wick J.R. The functional anatomy of the male and female reproductive systems of the milkweed bug, Oncopeltus fasciatus (Dallas) (Heteroptera: Lygaeidae). J. Morphol. 1953, 93:177-283.
16. Booksmythe I., Jennions M.D., Backwell P.R. Male fiddler crabs prefer conspecific females during simultaneous, but not sequential, mate choice. Anim. Behav. 2011, 81:775-778.
17. Bowers M.D. The evolution of unpalatability and the cost of chemical defense in insects. Insect chemical ecology: An evolutionary approach. xii+359p 1992, 216-244. Routledge Chapman and Hall, New York, USA; London, UK, Illus. ISBN 0-412-01881-0(paper); ISBN 0-412-01871-3(cloth). B.D. Roitberg, M.B. Isman (Eds.).
18. Costello A.K., Pultorak J.D., Meikle D.B. Do male house mice (Mus musculus) discriminate between females that differ in nutritional status?. Behav. Proc. 2009, 82:119-125.
19. Cothran R.D., Chapman K., Stiff A.R., Relyea R.A. Cryptic direct benefits of mate choice: choosy females experience reduced predation risk while in precopulation. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 2012, 66:905-913.
20. Cotton S., Small J., Pomiankowski A. Sexual selection and condition-dependent mate preferences. Curr. Biol. 2006, 16:R755-R765.
21. Davies N.B., Krebs J.R., West S.A. An Introduction To Behavioural Ecology 2012, Wiley-Blackwell.
22. De Wert L., Mahon K., Ruxton G.D. Protection by association: evidence for aposematic commensalism. Biol. J. Linnean Soc. 2012, 106:81-89.
23. Delisle J., Hardy M. Male larval nutrition influences the reproductive success of both sexes of the Spruce budworm, Choristoneura fumiferana (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). Funct. Ecol. 1997, 11:451-463.
24. Dingle H., Alden B.M., Blakley N.R., Kopec D., Miller E.R. Variation in photoperiodic response within and among species of milkweed bugs (Oncopeltus). Evolution 1980, 34:356-370.
25. Dingle H., Blakley N.R., Miller E.R. Variation in body size and flight performance in milkweed bugs (Oncopeltus). Evolution 1980, 34:371-385.
26. DiRienzo N., Marshall J.L. Function of the hemolymph nuptial gift in the ground cricket, Allonemobius socius. Ethology 2013, 119:104-109.
27. Dussourd D.E., Harvis C.A., Meinwald J., Eisner T. Pheromonal advertisement of a nuptial gift by a male moth (Utetheisa-ornatrix). Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 88 1991, 9224-9922.
28. Ebensperger L.A., Sobrero R., Quirici V., Castro R.A., Ortiz Tolhuysen L., Vargas F., Burger J.R., Quispe R., Villavicencio C.P., Vasquez R.A., Hayes L.D. Ecological drivers of group living in two populations of the communally rearing rodent, Octodon degus. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 2012, 66:261-274.
29. Edvardsson M. Female Callosobruchus maculatus mate when they are thirsty: resource-rich ejaculates as mating effort in a beetle. Anim. Behav. 2007, 74:183-188.
30. Eisner T., Smedley S.R., Young D.K., Eisner M., Roach B., Meinwald J. Chemical basis of courtship in a beetle (Neopyrochroa flabellata): Cantharidin as nuptial gift. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 93 1996, 6499-6650.
31. Eisner T., Smedley S.R., Young D.K., Eisner M., Roach B., Meinwald J. Chemical basis of courtship in a beetle (Neopyrochroa flabellata): Cantharidin as precopulatory enticing agent. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 93 1996, 6494-6498.
32. Feir D., Suen J.S. Cardenolides in milkweed plant and feeding by milkweed bug Hemiptera lygaeidae. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 1971, 64. 1173-&.
33. Fricke C., Bretman A., Chapman T. Female nutritional status determines the magnitude and sign of responses to a male ejaculate signal in Drosophila melanogaster. J. Evolution. Biol. 2010, 23:157-165.
34. Gamberale G., Tullberg B.S. Evidence for a more effective signal in aggregated aposematic prey. Anim. Behav. 1996, 52:597-601.
35. Gamberale G., Tullberg B.S. Aposematism and gregariousness: the combined effect of group size and coloration on signal repellence. Proceedings of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 265 1998, 889-894.
36. Giaquinto P.C., da Silva Berbert C.M., Delicio H.C. Female preferences based on male nutritional chemical traits. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 2010, 64:1029-1035.
37. Gonzalez A., Rossini C., Eisner M., Eisner T. Sexually transmitted chemical defense in a moth (Utetheisa ornatrix). Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 96 1999, 5570-6557.
38. Gschwentner R., Tadler A. Functional anatomy of the spermatheca and its duct in the seed bug Lygaeus simulans (Heteroptera: Lygaeidae). Eur. J. Entomol. 2000, 97:305-312.
39. Gwynne D.T. Sexual conflict over nuptial gifts in insects. Ann. Rev. Entomol. 2008, 53:83-101.
40. Hall M.D., Bussiere L.F., Brooks R. The effect of diet quality and wing morph on male and female reproductive investment in a nuptial feeding ground cricket. Plos One 2008, 3.
41. Higgins S.L., Hosken D.J., Wedell N. Phenotypic and genetic variation in male genitalia in the seedbug, Lygaeus equestris (Heteroptera). Biol. J. Linnean Soc. 2009, 98:400-405.
42. Holen O.H., Svennungsen T.O. Aposematism and the handicap principle. Am. Nature 2012, 180:629-641.
43. Jennions M.D., Petrie M. Variation in mate choice and mating preferences: a review of causes and consequences. Biol. Rev. Camb. Philos. Soc. 1997, 72:283-327.
44. Koella J.C., Bradbury J.W., Anderson M.B. Sexual selection: testing the alternatives. J. Evol. Biol. 1989, 2:72-74.
45. Kokko H., Brooks R., Jennions M.D., Morley J. The evolution of mate choice and mating biases. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 270 2003, 653-666.
46. Kotiaho J.S., Puurtinen M. Mate choice for indirect genetic benefits: scrutiny of the current paradigm. Funct. Ecol. 2007, 21:638-644.
47. Lomborg J.P., Toft S. Nutritional enrichment increases courtship intensity and improves mating success in male spiders. Behav. Ecol. 2009, 20:700-708.
48. MacLaren R.D., Rowland W.J. Differences in female preference for male body size in Poecilia latipinna using simultaneous versus sequential stimulus presentation designs. Behaviour 2006, 143:273-292.
49. McGhee K.E., Travis J. Early food and social environment affect certain behaviours but not female choice or male dominance in bluefin killifish. Anim. Behav. 2011, 82:139-147.
50. McLain D.K. Population-density and the intensity of sexual selection on body length in spatially or temporally restricted natural-populations of a seed bug. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 1992, 30:347-356.
51. Micholitsch T., Krugel P., Pass G. Insemination and fertilization in the seed bug Lygaeus simulans (Heteroptera: Lygaeidae). Euro. J. Entomol. 2000, 97:13-18.
52. Prokop Z.M., Michalczyk L., Drobniak S.M., Herdegen M., Radwan J. Meta-analysis suggests choosy females get sexy sons more than good genes. Evolution 2012, 66:2665-2673.
53. Pruitt J.N., Cote J., Ferrari M.C.O. Behavioural trait variants in a habitat-forming species dictate the nature of its interactions with and among heterospecifics. Funct. Ecol. 2012, 26:29-36.
54. Pruitt J.N., Ferrari M.C.O. Intraspecific trait variants determine the nature of interspecific interactions in a habitat-forming species. Ecology 2011, 92:1902-1908.
55. Ralph C.P. Natural food-requirements of large milkweed bug, Oncopeltus fasciatus (Hemiptera-Lygaeidae), and their relation to gregariousness and host plant morphology. Oecologia 1976, 26:157-175.
56. Ruxton G.D., Sherratt T.N., Speed M.P. Avoiding Attack - The Evolutionary Ecology Of Crypsis, Warning Signals, And Mimicry 2004, Oxford Press, Oxford.
57. Scudder G.G.E., Moore L.V., Isman M.B. Sequestration of cardenolides in Oncopeltus fasciatus - morphological and physiological adaptations. J. Chem. Ecol. 1986, 12:1171-1187.
58. Shuker D.M., Ballantyne G.A., Wedell N. Variation in the cost to females of the sexual conflict over mating in the seed bug, Lygaeus equestris. Anim. Behav. 2006, 72:313-321.
59. Shuker D.M., Day T.H. Mate sampling and the sexual conflict over mating in seaweed flies. Behav. Ecol. 2002, 13:83-86.
60. Sih A., Cote J., Evans M., Fogarty S., Pruitt J. Ecological implications of behavioural syndromes. Ecol. Lett. 2012, 15:278-289.
61. Sih A., Del Giudice M. Linking behavioural syndromes and cognition: a behavioural ecology perspective. Philos. Trans. Royal Soc. B-Biol. Sci. 2012, 367:2762-2772.
62. Sillen-Tullberg B. Prolonged copulation - a male post-copulatory strategy in a promiscuous species, Lygaeus equestris (Heteroptera, Lygaeidae). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 1981, 9:283-289.
63. Sillen-Tullberg B. Evolution of gregariousness in aposematic butterfly larvae - a phylogenetic analysis. Evolution 1988, 42:293-305.
64. Sillen-Tullberg B., Wiklund C., Jarvi T. Aposematic coloration in adults and larvae of Lygaeus equestris and its bearing on mullerian mimicry - an experimental study on predation on living bugs by the great tit Parus-major. Oikos 1982, 39:131-136.
65. Solbreck C., Olsson R., Anderson D.B., Forare J. Size, life-history and responses to food shortage in 2 geographical strains of a seed bug Lygaeus equestris. Oikos 1989, 55:387-396.
66. South S.H., House C.M., Moore A.J., Simpson S.J., Hunt J. Male cockroaches prefer a high carbohydrate diet that makes them more attractive to females: implications for the study of condition dependence. Evolution 2011, 65:1594-1606.
67. Speed M.P., Ruxton G.D., Mappes J., Sherratt T.N. Why are defensive toxins so variable? An evolutionary perspective. Biol. Rev. 2012, 87:874-884.
68. Svadova K.H., Exnerova A., Kopeckova M., Stys P. Predator dependent mimetic complexes: do passerine birds avoid Central European red-and-black Heteroptera?. Euro. J. Entomol. 2010, 107:349-355.
69. Tadler A., Nemeschkal H.L., Pass G. Selection of male traits during and after copulation in the seedbug Lygaeus simulans (Heteroptera, Lygaeidae). Biol. J. Linnean Soc. 1999, 68:471-483.
70. Tullberg B.S., Gamberale-Stille G., Solbreck C. Effects of food plant and group size on predator defence: differences between two co-occurring aposematic Lygaeinae bugs. Ecol. Entomol. 2000, 25:220-225.
71. Wagner W.E. Measuring female mating preferences. Anim. Behav. 1998, 55:1029-1042.
72. Walker W.F. Mating-behaviour on Oncopeltus fasciatus - Circadian-rhythms of coupling, copulation duration and rocking behaviour. Physiol. Entomol. 1979, 4:275-283.
73. Wheeler A.G. The small milkweed bug, Lygaeus kalmii (Hemiptera, Lygaeidae) - milkweed specialist or opportunist. J. New York Entomol. Soc. 1983, 91:57-62.
74. Yang L.H., Wang Q. Precopulation sexual selection in Nysius huttoni White (Heteroptera: Lygaeidae) in relation to morphometric traits. J. Insect Behav. 2004, 17:695-707.