IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v28y2017i4p1093-1100..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Resource availability, but not polyandry, influences sibling conflict in a burying beetle Nicrophorus vespilloides

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Botterill-James
  • Lucy Ford
  • Geoffrey M. While
  • Per T. Smiseth

Abstract

Lay SummaryFamily living is a fundamental characteristic of many organisms social life. Family living is maintained when conditions reduce conflicts between family members. Specifically, low levels of female multiple mating (which increases relatedness between family members) and high resource availability should lead to decreased family conflicts and increase family harmony. We tested this using a subsocial beetle. We show that family conflicts, measured via competitive offspring begging, are decreased when resource availability is high. In contrast, female polyandry had no effect on the level of family conflict.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Botterill-James & Lucy Ford & Geoffrey M. While & Per T. Smiseth, 2017. "Resource availability, but not polyandry, influences sibling conflict in a burying beetle Nicrophorus vespilloides," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 28(4), pages 1093-1100.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:28:y:2017:i:4:p:1093-1100.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/arx073
    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.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Francesca E Gray & Jon Richardson & Tom Ratz & Per T Smiseth, 2018. "No evidence for parent–offspring competition in the burying beetle Nicrophorus vespilloides," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 29(5), pages 1142-1149.

    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:28:y:2017:i:4:p:1093-1100.. 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.