Journal of Ecology and Environment

The Ecological Society of Korea (한국생태학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Male Mating Strategies through Manipulation of Female-perceived Predation Risk: A Minireview and a Hypothesis

  • Han, Chang-S. (Laboratory of Behavioral Ecology and Evolution, Department of Biological Sciences, College of Natural Sciences, Seoul National University) ;
  • Jablonski, Piotr G. (Laboratory of Behavioral Ecology and Evolution, Department of Biological Sciences, College of Natural Sciences, Seoul National University)
  • Published : 2008.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In this minireview we focus on how males may exploit female's sensitivity to predation risk in the context of mating. It has been shown in studies on guppies and jumping spiders that in response to altered female behaviors, which are adaptations to the unfavorable environment and a consequence of females' higher sensitivity to predator's presence as well as females' higher predation risk, males can adopt condition-dependent mating tactics. It appears that in such cases males do not modify their reproductive behavior directly in response to their own perception of predation risk, but indirectly in response to changes in female behavior induced by predator presence. It has also been recently shown in crabs that males can exploit female behavior by creating safer habitat spots, which increases the male mating success. Hence all the evidence suggests that males not only respond to female sensitivity to the natural variation in predation risk, but that males can also exploit female behavior by altering the environment. As a logical extension of these findings, we present a hypothesis that in certain conditions males can manipulate the environment in order to increase the predation risk and to induce female behaviors that enhance the male's mating success with the increased predation risk. We propose that such a manipulation to increase predation risk is expected to evolve in males of species with a strong sexual conflict and female-biased predation risk. Although empirical evidence has not been yet shown, initial observations in a water strider species in Korea, Gerris gracilicornis, seem to support this hypothesis.

Keywords

References

  1. Andersen NM. 1997. A phylogenetic analysis of the evolution of sexual dimorphism and mating systems in water striders (Hemiptera: Gerridae). Biol J Linn Soc. 61: 345-368 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8312.1997.tb01796.x
  2. Andersson M. 1994. Sexual Selection. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press
  3. Arnqvist G. 1989. Sexual selection in a water strider: the function, nature of selection and heritability of a male grasping apparatus. Oikos 56: 344-350 https://doi.org/10.2307/3565619
  4. Arnqvist, G. 1997. The evolution of water strider mating systems: causes and consequences of sexual conflicts. In: The Evolution of Mating Systems in Insects and Arachnids (Choe J, Crespi B, eds), pp 146-163. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York
  5. Arnqvist G, Rowe L. 2002a. Correlated evolution of male and female morphologies in water striders. Evolution 56: 936-947 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0014-3820.2002.tb01406.x
  6. Arnqvist G, Rowe L. 2002b. Antagonistic coevolution between the sexes in a group of insects. Nature 415: 787-789 https://doi.org/10.1038/415787a
  7. Arnqvist G, Rowe L. 2005. Sexual conflict. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press
  8. Bernal XE, Rand AS, Ryan MJ. 2007. Sexual differences in the behavioral response of tungara frogs, Physalaemus pustulosus, to cues associated with increased predation risk. Ethology 113: 755- 763 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0310.2007.01374.x
  9. Berglund A, Rosenqvist G. 1986. Reproductive costs in the prawn Palaemon adspersus: effects on growth and predator vulnerability. Oikos 46: 329-354
  10. Cooper Jr WE, LJ Vitt, R Hedges, RB Huey. 1990. Locomotor impairment and defense in gravid lizards (Eumeces laticeps): behavioral shift in activity may offset costs of reproduction in an active forager. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 27: 153-157
  11. Christy JH. 1995. Mimicry, mate choice, and the sensory trap hypothesis. Am Nat 146: 171-181 https://doi.org/10.1086/285793
  12. Christy JH, Backwell PRY, Goshima S, Kreuter T. 2002. Sexual selection for structure building by courting male fiddler crabs: an experimental study of behavioral mechanisms. Behav Ecol 13: 366-374 https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/13.3.366
  13. Endler JA. 1987. Predation, light intensity and courtship behaviour in Poecilia reticulata (Pisces: Poeciliidae). Anim Behav 35: 1376-1385 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-3472(87)80010-6
  14. Evans JP, Kelley JL, Ramnarine IW, Pilastro A. 2002. Female behaviour mediates male courtship under predation risk in the guppy (Poecilia reticulata). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 52: 496-502 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-002-0535-6
  15. Forsgren E. 1992. Predation risk affects mate choice in a gobiid fish. Am Nat 40: 1041-1049
  16. Gong A, Gibson RM. 1996. Reversal of a female preference after visual exposure to a predator in the guppy, Poecilia reticulata. Anim Behav 52: 1007-1015 https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.1996.0248
  17. Gregory PT, Crampton LH, Skebo KM. 1999. Conflicts and interactions among reproduction, thermoregulation and feeding in viviparous reptiles: are gravid snakes anorexic? J Zool 248: 231-241 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7998.1999.tb01199.x
  18. Gwynne DT. 1989. Does copulation increase the risk of predation? Trends Ecol Evol 4: 54-56 https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-5347(89)90144-4
  19. Han CS, Lee JH, Kang CG, Shin HS, Bae MR, Lee SI, Jablonski PG. 2007. The role of non-visual indirect sensory information in the effect of operational sex ratio on mating of a water strider. SNU J Student Research [serial online]. Available from: < http://journal. behecolpiotrsangim.org/>. Accessed 21 Feb 2008
  20. Hedrick AV, Dill LM. 1993. Mate choice by female crickets is influenced by predation risk. Anim Behav 46: 193-196 https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.1993.1176
  21. Johnson JB, Basolo AL. 2003. Predator exposure alters female mate choice in the green swordtail. Behav Ecol 14: 619-625 https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arg046
  22. Kim TW, Christy JH, Choe JC. 2004. Semidome building as sexual signaling in the fiddler crab Uca lacteal (Brachyura: OcyPodidae). J Crustacean Biol 24(4): 673-679 https://doi.org/10.1651/C-2471
  23. Kim TW, Christy JH, Choe JC. 2007. A Preference for a Sexual Signal keeps females safe. PLoS ONE 2(5): e422 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0000422
  24. Koga T, Backwell PRY, Jennions MD, Christy JH. 1998. Elevated predation risk changes mating behaviour and courtship in a fiddler crab. Proc Roy Soc Lond B 265: 1385-1390
  25. Koga T, Backwell PRY, Christy JH, Murai M, Kasuya E. 2001. Male biased predation of a fiddler crab. Anim Behav 62: 201-207 https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.2001.1740
  26. Lima SL, Dill LM. 1990. Behavioral decisions made under the risk of predation: a review and prospectus. Can J Zool 68: 619-640 https://doi.org/10.1139/z90-092
  27. Longland WS, Jenkins SH. 1987. Sex and age affect vulnerability of desert rodents to owl predation. J Mammal 68(4): 746-754 https://doi.org/10.2307/1381551
  28. Magnhagen C. 1991. Predation risk as a cost of reproduction. Trends Ecol Evol 6: 183-186 https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-5347(91)90210-O
  29. Magurran AE, Nowak MA. 1991. Another battle of the sexes: the consequences of sexual asymmetry in mating costs and predation risk in the guppy, Poecilia reticulata. Proc R Soc Lond B 246: 31-38
  30. Maier G, Berger I, Burghard W, Nassal B. 2000. Is mating of copepods associated with increased risk of predation? J Plankton Res 22(10): 1977-1987 https://doi.org/10.1093/plankt/22.10.1977
  31. Pocklington R, Dill LM. 1995. Predation on females or males: who pays for bright male traits? Anim Behav 49: 1122-1124 https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.1995.0141
  32. Ronkainen H, Ylonen H. 1994. Behaviour of cyclic bank voles under risk of mustelid predation: do females avoid copulations? Oecologia 97(3): 377-381 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00317328
  33. Rosenqvist G, Berglund A. 1992. Is female sexual behaviour a neglected topic? Trends Ecol Evol 7: 174-176 https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-5347(92)90066-K
  34. Rowe L. 1992. Ecology and evolution of reproductive biology in the waterstrider Gerris buenoi. PhD dissertation, University of British Colum
  35. Rowe L. 1994. The costs of mating and mate choice in water striders. Anim Behav 48: 1049-1056 https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.1994.1338
  36. Sakaluk SK, Belwood JJ. 1984. Gecko phonotaxis to cricket calling song: A case of satellite predation. Anim Behav 32: 659-662 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-3472(84)80141-4
  37. Shine R. 1980. 'Cost' of reproduction in reptiles. Oecologia 46: 92-100 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00346972
  38. Shaffer L, Formanowicz D. 1996. A cost of viviparity and parental care in scorpions: reduced sprint speed and behavioural compensation. Anim Behav 51: 1017-1023 https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.1996.0104
  39. Schwarzkopf L, Shine R. 1992. Costs of reproduction in lizards: escape tactics and susceptibility to predation. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 31: 17-25 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00167812
  40. Seigel RA, Huggins MM, Ford NB. 1987. Reduction in locomotor ability as a cost of reproduction in snakes. Oecologia 73: 481-465 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00379404
  41. Sih A, Krupa J, Travers S. 1990. An experimental study on the effects of predation risk and feeding regime on the mating behavior of the water strider. Am Nat 135: 284-290 https://doi.org/10.1086/285044
  42. Sih A, Krupa J. 1995. Interacting effects of predation risk and male and female density on male/female conflicts and mating dynamics of stream water striders. Behav Ecol 6: 316-325 https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/6.3.316
  43. Sivinski J. 1980. The effects of mating on predation in the stick insect Diapheromera veliei Walsh (Phasmatodea: Heteronemiidae). Ann Entomol Soc Am 73: 553-556 https://doi.org/10.1093/aesa/73.5.553
  44. Su KFY, Li D. 2006. Female-biased predation risk and its differential effect on the male courtship behavior of jumping spiders. Anim Behav 71: 531-537 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2005.04.024
  45. Verrell PA. 1985. Male mate choice for large, fecund females in the red-spotted newt, Notophthalmus viridescens: how is size assessed? Herpetologica 41: 382-386
  46. Vuorinen I, Rajasilta M, Salo J. 1983. Selective predation and habitat shift in a copepod species - support for the predation hypothesis. Oecologia 59: 62-64 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00388073
  47. Wing SR. 1985. Prolonged copulation in Photinus macdermotti with comparative notes on Photinus collustrans (Coleoptera: Lampyridae). The Florida Entomologist 68(4): 627-634 https://doi.org/10.2307/3494865
  48. Wing SR. 1988. Cost of mating for female insects: risk of predation in Photinus collustrans (Coleoptera: Lampyridae). Am Nat 131(1): 139-142 https://doi.org/10.1086/284780

Cited by

  1. Long-term dynamic structural memory in water: can it exist? vol.57, pp.1, 2014, https://doi.org/10.3367/UFNe.0184.201401b.0043