IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v26y2015i2p359-366..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Males do not always switch females when presented with a better reproductive option

Author

Listed:
  • Matthias Galipaud
  • Loïc Bollache
  • Abderrahim Oughadou
  • François-Xavier Dechaume-Moncharmont

Abstract

Paired individuals are expected to leave their current partner for newly encountered ones of higher quality. In such cases, animals should therefore be able to compare the quality of their current partner to the quality of a new prospective mate next to the couple. We tested this prediction in Gammarus pulex, an amphipod species where paired males have been described to switch females before copulation. Contrary to expectations, a majority of males remained paired to their current female when presented to an unpaired female of higher quality. In fact, males did not seem to compare the quality of the 2 females before switching. They rather based their decision on the quality of their current female only, switching when it was of low quality. We suggest that mate switching functions as a male mate choice strategy under strong competition for female access in G. pulex. Unpaired males may first randomly pair with a female to gather information about its quality as a mate before switching for a new female when the expected quality of unpaired females in the population exceeds that of their current partner.

Suggested Citation

  • Matthias Galipaud & Loïc Bollache & Abderrahim Oughadou & François-Xavier Dechaume-Moncharmont, 2015. "Males do not always switch females when presented with a better reproductive option," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 26(2), pages 359-366.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:26:y:2015:i:2:p:359-366.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/aru195
    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:26:y:2015:i:2:p:359-366.. 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.