IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v19y2008i4p810-815.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sex-specific differences in immunological costs of multiple mating in Gryllus vocalis field crickets

Author

Listed:
  • Susan N. Gershman

Abstract

Although mating can be costly, most individuals must choose not whether to mate but how many times to mate. This study examined the immunological costs of additional matings once an individual has already mated. Gryllus vocalis field crickets were assigned to mate 5 or 10 times and their immunocompetence probed by measuring their ability to withstand a bacterial challenge by Serratia marcescens, assaying lysozyme-like enzyme activity and phenoloxidase activity, and measuring their success in encapsulating a monofilament implant. Although number of matings generally did not affect the strength of immune responses, females had superior immunity to males in most assays. Females that mated 10 times did, however, have lower lysozyme-like enzyme levels than females that mated 5 times, suggesting that mating can compromise at least one component of female standing immunity. When individuals were allowed to mate ad libitum and their lysozyme-like enzyme activity, phenoloxidase activity, and encapsulation responses measured, there was not a relationship between female mating frequency and lysozyme-like enzyme activity. This result suggests that females may avoid immunological costs of mating by differentially moderating their mating frequency. Copyright 2008, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Susan N. Gershman, 2008. "Sex-specific differences in immunological costs of multiple mating in Gryllus vocalis field crickets," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 19(4), pages 810-815.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:19:y:2008:i:4:p:810-815
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/arn040
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:19:y:2008:i:4:p:810-815. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/beheco .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.