The dominance of seismic signaling and selection for signal complexity in Schizocosa multimodal courtship displays

Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

Volumn 67, Issue 9, 2013, Pages 1483-1498

  Hebets, Eileen A ^a   Vink, Cor J ^b,c   Sullivan Beckers, Laura ^a   Rosenthal, Malcolm F ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA   (United States)

^b AGRESEARCH LTD   (New Zealand)

^c LINCOLN UNIVERSITY   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

Communication; Diversification; Female choice; Repertoire size; Sexual selection; Signal efficacy

Indexed keywords

COURTSHIP; DOMINANCE; FEMALE; MALE; MATING SUCCESS; ORNAMENTATION; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SEXUAL SELECTION; SIGNALING; SPIDER;

ARANEAE; LYCOSIDAE; SCHIZOCOSA;

EID: 84883760544     PISSN: 03405443     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00265-013-1519-4     Document Type: Article

References (96)

1. Basolo AL (1990) Female preference predates the evolution of the sword in swordtail fish. Science 250(4982): 808-810.
2. Beckers OM, Wagner WE (2011) Mate sampling strategy in a field cricket: evidence for a fixed threshold strategy with last chance option. Anim Behav 81(3): 519-527. doi: 10. 1016/j. anbehav. 2010. 11. 022.
3. Bell PD (1980) Transmission of vibrations along plant stems: implications for insect communication. J N Y Entomol Soc 88: 210-216.
4. Bern MD (2011) Exploring sources of selection on the multimodal courtship displays of two sister species of wolf spiders: Schizocosa crassipalpata and Schizocosa bilineata. University of Nebraska, Lincoln.
5. Blomberg SP, Garland T, Ives AR (2003) Testing for phylogenetic signal in comparative data: behavioral traits are more labile. Evolution 57(4): 717-745. doi: 10. 1111/j. 0014-3820. 2003. tb00285. x.
6. Botero CA, Mudge AE, Koltz AM, Hochachka WM, Vehrencamp SL (2008) How reliable are the methods for estimating repertoire size? Ethology 114(12): 1227-1238. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1439-0310. 2008. 01576. x.
7. Boughman JW (2002) How sensory drive can promote speciation. Trends Ecol Evol 17(12): 571-577.
8. Brandley MC, Schmitz A, Reeder TW (2005) Partitioned Bayesian analyses, partition choice, and the phylogenetic relationships of scincid lizards. Syst Biol 54: 373-390.
9. Byers J, Hebets E, Podos J (2010) Female mate choice based upon male motor performance. Anim Behav 79: 771-778.
10. Candolin U (2003) The use of multiple cues in mate choice. Biol Rev 78(4): 575-595.
11. Chang J, Song D, Zhou K (2007) Incongruous nuclear and mitochondrial phylogeographic patterns in two sympatric lineages of the wolf spider Pardosa astrigera (Araneae; Lycosidae) from China. Mol Phylogenet Evol 42: 104-121.
12. Chen I, Stuart-Fox DM, Hugall AF, Symonds MRE (2012) Sexual selection and the evolution of complex color patterns in dragon lizards. Evolution 66: 3605-3614.
13. Cocroft RB, Rodriguez RL (2005) The behavioral ecology of insect vibrational communication. Bioscience 55(4): 323-334. doi: 10. 1641/0006-3568(2005)055[0323: tbeoiv]2. 0. co;2.
14. Darwin C (1871) The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex. J. Murray, London.
15. Dondale CD, Redner JH (1978) Revision of nearctic wolf spider genus Schizocosa (Arachneida Lycosidae). Can Entomol 110(2): 143-181.
16. Douglas SB, Mennill DJ (2010) A review of acoustic playback techniques for studying avian vocal duets. J Field Ornithol 81(2): 115-129. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1557-9263. 2010. 00268. x.
17. Elias DO, Mason AC, Hoy RR (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(23): 4105-4110.
18. Elias DO, Land BR, Mason AC, Hoy RR (2006a) Measuring and quantifying dynamic visual signals in jumping spiders. Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol 192(8): 785-797. doi: 10. 1007/s00359-006-0116-7.
19. Elias DO, Lee N, Hebets EA, Mason AC (2006b) Seismic signal production in a wolf spider: parallel versus serial multi-component signals. J Exp Biol 209(6): 1074-1084. doi: 10. 1242/jeb. 02104.
20. Elias DO, Mason AC, Hebets EA (2010) A signal-substrate match in the substrate-borne component of a multimodal courtship display. Curr Zool 56(3): 370-378.
21. Elias DO, Maddison WP, Peckmezian C, Girard MB, Mason AC (2012) Orchestrating the score: complex multimodal courtship in the Habronattus coecatus group of Habronattus jumping spiders (Araneae: Slaticidae). Biol J Linnean Soc 105: 522-547.
22. Endler JA (1992) Signals, signal conditions, and the direction of evolution. Am Nat 139: S125-S153.
23. Endler JA, Basolo AL (1998) Sensory ecology, receiver biases and sexual selection. Trends Ecol Evol 13(10): 415-420.
24. Felsenstein J (1981) Evolutionary trees from DNA sequences: a miximum likelihood approach. J Mol Evol 17: 368-376.
25. Fowler-Finn KD (2009) Exploring the maintenance of and selection on two distinct male morphs in a Schizocosa wolf spider. University of Nebraska, Lincoln.
26. Framenau VW, Hebets EA (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(1): 89-101.
27. Gerhardt HC (1982) Sound pattern-recognition in some North-American treefrogs (Anura, Hylidae)-implications for mate choice. Am Zool 22(3): 581-595.
28. Gerhardt HC, Huber F (2002) Acoustic communication in insects and anurans. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
29. Gibson JS, Uetz GW (2008) Seismic communication and mate choice in wolf spiders: components of male seismic signals and mating success. Anim Behav 75: 1253-1262.
30. Gibson JS, Uetz GW (2012) Effect of rearing environment and food availability on seismic signalling in male wolf spiders (Araneae: Lycosidae). Anim Behav 84(1): 85-92. doi: 10. 1016/j. anbehav. 2012. 04. 010.
31. Gordon SD, Uetz GW (2011) Multimodal communication of wolf spiders on different substrates: evidence for behavioural plasticity. Anim Behav 81: 367-375.
32. Grant PR, Grant BR (1997) Genetics and the origin of bird species. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 94(15): 7768-7775. doi: 10. 1073/pnas. 94. 15. 7768.
33. Hasegawa M, Kishino K, Yano T (1985) Dating the human-ape splitting by a molecular clock of mitochondrial DNA. J Mol Evol 22: 160-174.
34. Hebets E (2003) Subadult experience influences adult mate choice in an arthropod: exposed female wolf spiders prefer males of a familiar phenotype. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 100(23): 13390-13395.
35. Hebets EA (2005) Attention-altering signal interactions in the multimodal courtship display of the wolf spider Schizocosa uetzi. Behav Ecol 16(1): 75-82. doi: 10. 1093/beheco/arh133.
36. Hebets EA (2007) Subadult female experience does not influence species recognition in the wolf spider Schizocosa uetzi Stratton 1997. J Arachnol 35(1): 1-10.
37. Hebets EA (2008) Seismic signal dominance in the multimodal courtship display of the wolf spider Schizocosa stridulans Stratton 1991. Behav Ecol 19(6): 1250-1257.
38. Hebets EA (2011) Current status and future directions of research in complex signaling. Current Zoology 57: i-v.
39. Hebets EA, Papaj DR (2005) Complex signal function: developing a framework of testable hypotheses. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 57(3): 197-214.
40. Hebets EA, Uetz GW (1999) Female responses to isolated signals from multimodal male courtship displays in the wolf spider genus Schizocosa (Araneae: Lycosidae). Anim Behav 57: 865-872.
41. Hebets EA, Uetz GW (2000) Leg ornamentation and the efficacy of courtship display in four species of wolf spider (Araneae: Lycosidae). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 47(4): 280-286.
42. Hebets EA, Vink CJ (2007) Experience leads to preference: experienced females prefer brush-legged males in a population of syntopic wolf spiders. Behav Ecol 18: 1010-1020.
43. Hebets EA, Stratton GE, Miller GL (1996) Habitat and courtship behavior of the wolf spider Schizocosa retrorsa (Banks) (Araneae, Lycosidae). J Arachnol 24(2): 141-147.
44. Hebets EA, Elias DO, Mason AC, Miller GL, Stratton GE (2008a) Substrate-dependent signalling success in the wolf spider, Schizocosa retrorsa. Anim Behav 75: 605-615.
45. Hebets EA, Wesson J, Shamble PS (2008b) Diet influences mate choice selectivity in adult female wolf spiders. Anim Behav 76: 355-363.
46. Hebets EA, Stafstrom JA, Rodriguez RL, Wilgers DJ (2011) Enigmatic ornamentation eases male reliance on courtship performance for mating success. Anim Behav 81: 963-972.
47. Johnstone RA (1996) Multiple displays in animal communication: 'backup signals' and 'multiple messages'. Philos Trans R Soc Lond Ser B-Biol Sci 351(1337): 329-338.
48. Kembel S, Cowan P, Helmus M, Cornwell W, Morlon H, Ackerly D, Blomberg S, Webb C (2010) Picante: R tools for integrating phylogenies and ecology. Bioinformatics 26: 1463-1464.
49. Kraaijeveld K, Kraaijeveld-Smit FJL, Maan ME (2011) Sexual selection and speciation: the comparative evidence revisited. Biol Rev 86(2): 367-377. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1469-185X. 2010. 00150. x.
50. McClintock WJ, Uetz GW (1996) Female choice and pre-existing bias: visual cues during courtship in two Schizocosa wolf spiders (Araneae: Lycosidae). Anim Behav 52: 167-181.
51. Miller GL, Stratton GE, Miller PR, Hebets E (1998) Geographical variation in male courtship behaviour and sexual isolation in wolf spiders of the genus Schizocosa. Anim Behav 56: 937-951.
52. Møller AP, Pomiankowski A (1993) Why have birds got multiple sexual ornaments. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 32(3): 167-176.
53. Nakagawa S, Cuthill IC (2007) Effect size, confidence interval and statistical significance: a practical guide for biologists. Biol Rev 82(4): 591-605. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1469-185X. 2007. 00027. x.
54. Nylander JAA (2008) MrModeltest 2. 3. In. Department of Systematic Zoology, Uppsala University, Uppsala.
55. Page R (1996) TREEVIEW: an application to display phylogenetic trees on personal computers. Comp Appl Biol Sci 12: 357-358.
56. Paradis E, Claude J, Strimmer K (2004) APE: analyses of phylogenetics and evolution in R language. Bioinformatics 20: 289-290.
57. Partan S, Marler P (1999) Behavior-communication goes multimodal. Science 283(5406): 1272-1273.
58. Persons MH, Uetz GW (2005) Sexual cannibalism and mate choice decisions in wolf spiders: influence of male size and secondary sexual characters. Anim Behav 69: 83-94.
59. Posada D, Buckley TR (2004) Model selection and model averaging in phylogenetics: advantages of Akaike information criterion and Bayesian approaches over likelihood ratio tests. Syst Biol 53: 793-808.
60. Rambaut A, Drummond AJ (2009) Tracerv1. 5. In, 1. 5 edn.
61. Ritchie MG (2007) Sexual selection and speciation. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 38: 79-102.
62. Rodriguez RL, Boughman JW, Gray DA, Hebets EA, Hobel G, Symes LB (2013) Diversification under sexual selection: the relative importance of preference divergence versus preference strength (in review).
63. Rodriguez RL, Ramaswamy K, Cocroft RB (2006) Evidence that female preferences have shaped male signal evolution in a clade of specialized plant-feeding insects. P Roy Soc B-Biol Sci 273(1601): 2585-2593. doi: 10. 1098/rspb. 2006. 3635.
64. Ronquist F, Huelsenbeck JP (2003) MrBayes3: Bayesian phylogenetic inference under mixed models. Bioinformatics 19: 1572-1574.
65. Rosenthal M, Hebets E (2012) Resource heterogeneity interacts with courtship rate to influence mating success in the wolf spier S. floridana. Anim Behav 84: 1341-1346.
66. Rowe C (1999) Receiver psychology and the evolution of multicomponent signals. Anim Behav 58: 921-931.
67. Rundus AS, Santer RD, Hebets EA (2010) Multimodal courtship efficacy of Schizocosa retrorsa wolf spiders: implications of an additional signal modality. Behav Ecol 21(4): 701-707. doi: 10. 1093/beheco/arq042.
68. Rundus AS, Sullivan-Beckers L, Wilgers DJ, Hebets EA (2011) Females are choosier in the dark: environment-dependent reliance on courtship components and its impact on fitness. Evolution 65(1): 268-282. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1558-5646. 2010. 01125. x.
69. Scheffer SJ, Uetz GW, Stratton GE (1996) Sexual selection, male morphology, and the efficacy of courtship signalling in two wolf spiders (Araneae: Lycosidae). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 38(1): 17-23.
70. Servedio MR (2012) The relationship between sexual selection and speciation. Curr Zool 58(3): 413-415.
71. Shamble PS, Wilgers DJ, Swoboda KA, Hebets EA (2009) Courtship effort is a better predictor of mating success than ornamentation for male wolf spiders. Behav Ecol 20(6): 1242-1251. doi: 10. 1093/beheco/arp116.
72. Shaw KL, Parsons YM (2002) Divergence of mate recognition behavior and its consequences for genetic architectures of speciation. Am Nat 159: S61-S75. doi: 10. 1086/338373.
73. Stafstrom JA, Hebets EA (2013) Female mate choice for multimodal courtship and the importance of the signaling background for selection on male ornamentation. Current Zoology 59(2): 200-209.
74. Stratton GE (1991) A new species of wolf spider, Schizocosa stridulans (Araneae, Lycosidae). J Arachnol 19(1): 29-39.
75. Stratton GE (1997) A new species of Schizocosa from the southeastern USA (Araneae, Lycosidae). J Arachnol 25(1): 84-92.
76. Stratton GE (2005) Evolution of ornamentation and courtship behavior in Schizocosa: insights from a phylogeny based on morphology (Araneae, Lycosidae). J Arachnol 33: 347-376.
77. Stratton GE, Uetz GW (1981) Acoustic communication and reproductive isolation in 2 species of wolf spiders. Science 214(4520): 575-577.
78. Stratton GE, Uetz GW (1983) Communication via substratum-coupled stridulation and reproductive isolation in wolf spiders (Araneae, Lycosidae). Anim Behav 31(FEB): 164-172.
79. Sullivan-Beckers L, Hebets EA (2011) Modality-specific experience with female feedback increases the efficacy of courtship signalling in male wolf spiders. Anim Behav 82(5): 1051-1057. doi: 10. 1016/j. anbehav. 2011. 07. 040.
80. Swofford DL (2002) PAUP*: phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and other methods). In, 4. 0b10 edn. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland.
81. Taylor PW, Roberts JA, Uetz GW (2005) Flexibility in the multi-modal courtship of a wolf spider, Schizocosa ocreata. J Ethol 23(1): 71-75.
82. Taylor PW, Roberts JA, Uetz GW (2006) Mating in the absence of visual cues by Schizocosa ocreata (Hentz 1844) wolf spiders (Araneae, Lycosidae). J Arachnol 34(3): 501-505.
83. Tietjen WJ (1979) Is the sex pheromone of Lycosa rabida (Araneae, Lycosidae) deposited on a substratum? J Arachnol 6: 207-212.
84. Tobias JA, Aben J, Brumfield RT, Derryberry EP, Halfwerk W, Slabbekoorn H, Seddon N (2010) Song divergence by sensory drive in Amazonian birds. Evolution 64(10): 2820-2839. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1558-5646. 2010. 01067. x.
85. Uetz GW, Dondale CD (1979) New wolf spider in the genus Schizocosa (Araneae, Lycosidae) from Illinois. J Arachnol 7(1): 86-88.
86. Uetz GW, Norton S (2007) Preference for male traits in female wolf spiders varies with the choice of available males, female age, and reproductive state. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 61: 631-641.
87. Uetz GW, Roberts JA (2002) Multisensory cues and multimodal communication in spiders: insights from video/audio playback studies. Brain Behav Evol 59(4): 222-230.
88. Uetz GW, 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(3): 461-469.
89. Uetz GW, Roberts JA, Taylor PW (2009) Multimodal communication and mate choice in wolf spiders: female response to multimodal versus unimodal signals. Anim Behav 78(2): 299-305. doi: 10. 1016/j. anbehav. 2009. 04. 023.
90. Uy A, Safran RD (2013) Variation in the temporal and spatial use of signals and its implications for multimodal communication. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. doi: 10. 1007/s00265-013-1492-y.
91. Vaccaro R, Uetz GW, Roberts JA (2010) Courtship and mating behavior of the wolf spider Schizocosa bilineata (Araneae: Lycosidae). J Arachnol 38: 452-459.
92. Vink CJ, Paterson AM (2003) Combined molecular and morphological phylogenetic analyses of the New Zealand wolf spider genus Anoteropsis (Araneae: Lycosidae). Mol Phylogenet Evol 28: 576-587.
93. Vink CJ, Thomas SM, Paquin P, Hayashi CY, Hedin MC (2005) The effects of preservatives and temperatures on arachnid DNA. Invertebrate Systematics 19: 99-104.
94. Wilgers DJ, Hebets EA (2011) Complex courtship displays facilitate male reproductive success and plasticity in signaling across variable environments. Current Zoology 57(2): 175-186.
95. Wilgers DJ, Hebets EA (2012a) Age-related female mating decisions are condition dependent in wolf spiders. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 66(1): 29-38. doi: 10. 1007/s00265-011-1248-5.
96. Wilgers DJ, Hebets EA (2012b) Seismic signaling is crucial for female mate choice in a multimodal signaling wolf spider. Ethology 118(4): 387-397. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1439-0310. 2012. 02023. x.