IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v15y2004i4p621-628.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Behavioral dynamics between caring males and females in a beetle with facultative biparental care

Author

Listed:
  • Per T. Smiseth
  • Allen J. Moore

Abstract

In families in which both parents care for multiple offspring, the amount of care a parent provides can be simultaneously influenced by multiple social interactions (i.e., parent-parent and parent-offspring). In this study, we first tested for sex differences in the parents' contribution to care and then used path analysis to address the simultaneous impact of parent-parent and parent-offspring interactions on male and female care in the burying beetle, Nicrophorus vespilloides. In this species, both parents provision their offspring predigested carrion from a vertebrate carcass, and the larvae beg for food from their parents. We found that females were more involved in direct care for the larvae and spent more time than did males provisioning the larvae with food. By using path analysis, we found a negative relationship between male and female provisioning, suggesting that parents adjust their behavior to that of their mate. Furthermore, we found that both social interactions (i.e., larval begging) and nonsocial factors (i.e., brood size) significantly influenced male provisioning, but had no significant effect on female provisioning. We suggest that the difference in the relative contribution of the two sexes to the care of the offspring explains why only males seemed to adjust their care to variation in social and nonsocial factors. For example, females may be less able to adjust their care to variation in larval begging and brood size because they were already working near their maximum capacity. Copyright 2004.

Suggested Citation

  • Per T. Smiseth & Allen J. Moore, 2004. "Behavioral dynamics between caring males and females in a beetle with facultative biparental care," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 15(4), pages 621-628, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:15:y:2004:i:4:p:621-628
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/arh053
    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.

    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:15:y:2004:i:4:p:621-628. 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.