Skip Navigation


Behavioral Ecology Advance Access originally published online on June 11, 2004
Behavioral Ecology 2004 15(5):845-849; doi:10.1093/beheco/arh113
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Lay Summary
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
15/5/845    most recent
arh113v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (7)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Sakaluk, S. K.
Right arrow Articles by Keorpes, P. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Sakaluk, S. K.
Right arrow Articles by Keorpes, P. A.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Behavioral Ecology vol. 15 no. 5 © International Society for Behavioral Ecology 2004; all rights reserved

Hemolymph loss during nuptial feeding constrains male mating success in sagebrush crickets

Scott K. Sakaluka, Mark T. H. Campbella, Andrew P. Clarkb, J. Chadwick Johnsona and Peter A. Keorpesa

a Behavior, Ecology, Evolution and Systematics Section, Department of Biological Sciences, Illinois State University, Normal, IL 61790-4120, USA b Department of Psychology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON L8S 4K1, Canada

Address correspondence to S. K. Sakaluk. E-mail: sksakal{at}ilstu.edu. J. C. Johnson is now at the Division of Life Sciences, University of Toronto at Scarborough, 1265 Military Trail, Scarborough, Ontario M1C 1A4, Canada.

Although costs of mating have been widely documented in females, intrinsic costs of copulation have been poorly documented in males, and there is little evidence that such costs constrain male mating success under natural conditions. Male sagebrush crickets, Cyphoderris strepitans, offer females an unusual somatic food gift at copulation that may constitute a significant cost of copulation: females chew on the ends of the males' fleshy hind wings and ingest hemolymph seeping from the wounds they inflict. Previous studies have shown that once a male has mated, his probability of obtaining an additional copulation is reduced relative to that of a virgin male seeking to secure his first mating. If the future mating prospects of nonvirgin males are diminished because of the costs of copulation, this could stem either from the resources required to manufacture a new spermatophore or through the energy needed to replenish hemolymph lost through female wing-feeding. To distinguish between these two alternatives, we experimentally depleted virgin males of varying amounts hemolymph in a way that mimicked hemolymph loss of nonvirgin males, without the attendant costs of spermatophore production. After they had been treated, males were released in the field and recaptured over the course of the breeding season to monitor their mating success. Control males mated significantly sooner than did males depleted of hemolymph. We conclude, therefore, that the depletion of hemolymph that occurs through female wing feeding is sufficient by itself to diminish a nonvirgin male's ability to secure another mating.

Key words: costs of mating, Cyphoderris strepitans, mating success, nuptial food gift, sagebrush crickets, sexual selection.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Behav EcolHome page
K. Vahed
Comparative evidence for a cost to males of manipulating females in bushcrickets
Behav. Ecol., May 1, 2007; 18(3): 499 - 506.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.