Author
Listed:
- Scott K. Sakaluk
- Mark T. H. Campbell
- Andrew P. Clark
- J. Chadwick Johnson
- Peter A. Keorpes
Abstract
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. Copyright 2004.
Suggested Citation
Scott K. Sakaluk & Mark T. H. Campbell & Andrew P. Clark & J. Chadwick Johnson & Peter A. Keorpes, 2004.
"Hemolymph loss during nuptial feeding constrains male mating success in sagebrush crickets,"
Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 15(5), pages 845-849, September.
Handle:
RePEc:oup:beheco:v:15:y:2004:i:5:p:845-849
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to
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:5:p:845-849. 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.