Stay informed about this journal!
Stay informed about this journal!
When mating interactions are influenced by multiple sources of selection, they may involve multiple stages of mate assessment. At each stage, a different set of morphological and behavioural traits may be important in determining the outcome of the interaction. Here, we test the potential for multiple sources of selection to shape mating interactions inLeiobunum vittatum harvestmen, commonly known as ‘daddy longlegs’. We provide a qualitative and quantitative study of mating interactions, and investigate the influence of multiple morphological traits on each of several distinct stages of their mating interactions. Mating interactions start with a struggle between males and females during which the male attempts to secure the females in a mating embrace. Success at this stage depends on the length of the male’s clasping pedipalps: those with shorter pedipalps (and thus greater mechanical advantage) were more successful. Male size relative to the female determines how quickly males achieve this embrace. Mating interactions then proceed to tactile exchanges between males and females, indicating the potential for mutual mate choice and/or peri- and post-copulatory selection. We found no morphological predictors of the timing of these later stages of the mating interactions, and suggest that the exchange of a nuptial gift is important for the dynamics of these stages. Overall, our results highlightL. vittatum as a potentially highly informative group for studying how traits involved in mating are shaped by the interaction of selection across multiple stages in mating interactions.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
AlexanderR.D.,MarshallD.,CooleyJ. (1997).Evolutionary perspectives on insect mating. — In:The evolution of mating systems in insects and arachnids. (ChoeJ.C.,CrespiB.J., eds).Cambridge University Press,Cambridge, p. 4-31.
AnderssonM. (1994).Sexual selection. —Princeton University Press,Princeton, NJ.
AnderssonM.,SimmonsL.W. (2006).Sexual selection and mate choice. —Trends Ecol. Evol.21:296-301.
ApontesP.,BrownC.A. (2005).Between-sex variation in running speed and a potential cost of leg autotomy in the wolf spiderPirata sedentarius. —Am. Midl. Nat.154:115-125.
ArnqvistG. (1992).Pre-copulatory fighting in a water strider: inter-sexual conflict or mate assessment? —Anim. Behav.43:559-567.
ArnqvistG.,EdvardssonM.,FribergU.,NilssonT. (2000).Sexual conflict promotes speciation in insects. —Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA97:10460-10464.
ArnqvistG.,RoweL. (2005).Sexual conflict. —Princeton University Press,Princeton, NJ.
BondurianskyR. (2001).The evolution of male mate choice in insects: a synthesis of ideas and evidence. —Biol. Rev.76:305-339.
BrennanP.L.R.,PrumR.O. (2012).The limits of sexual conflict in the narrow sense: new insights from waterfowl biology. —Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. B367:2324-2338.
BurnsM.,HedinM.,ShultzJ.W. (2012).Molecular phylogeny of the leiobunine harvestment of eastern North American (Opiliones: Sclerosomatidae: Leiobuninae). —Mol. Phylogenet. Evol.63:291-298.
BurnsM.,HedinM.,ShultzJ.W. (2013).Comparative analyses of reproductive structures in harvestmen (Opiliones) reveal multiple transitions from courtship to precopulatory antagonism. —PLoS One8:e66767.
ChapmanT.,ArnqvistG.,BanghamJ.,RoweL. (2003).Sexual conflict. —Trends Ecol. Evol.18:41-47.
Clutton-BrockT.,ParkerG.A. (1995).Sexual coercion in animal societies. —Anim. Behav.49:1345-1365.
CorderoC.,EberhardW.G. (2003).Female choice of sexually antagonistic male adaptations: a critical review of some current research. —J. Evol. Biol.1:1-6.
Costa-SchmidtL.E.,CaricoJ.E.,de AraujoA.M. (2008).Nuptial gifts and sexual behavior in two species of spider (Araneae, Trechaleiodae, Paratrechalea). —Naturwissenschaften95:731-739.
EberhardW.G. (1985).Sexual selection and animal genitalia. —Harvard University Press,Cambridge, MA.
EberhardW.G. (1996).Female control: sexual selection by cryptic female choice. —Princeton Univerity Press,Princeton, NJ.
EberhardW.G.,CorderoC. (2003).Sexual conflict and female choice. —Trends Ecol. Evol.9:438-439.
EdgarA.L. (1971).Studies on the biology and ecology of MichiganPhalangida (Opiliones). —Misc. Publ. Mus. Zool. Univ. Michigan144:1-64.
GibsonR.M.,LangenT.A. (1996).How do animals choose their mates? —Trends Ecol. Evol.11:468-470.
GwynneD.T. (2008).Sexual conflict over nuptial gifts in insects. —Annu. Rev. Entomol.53:83-101.
HebetsE.A.,WessonJ.,ShambleP.S. (2008).Diet influences mate choice selectivity in adult female wolf spiders. —Anim. Behav.76:355-363.
HollandB.,RiceW.R. (1998).Perspective: chase-away sexual selection: antagonistic seduction versus resistance. —Evolution52:1-7.
KirkpatrickM. (1987).Sexual selection by female choice in polygynous animals. —Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst.18:43-70.
KokkoH.,BrooksR.,McNamaraJ.M.,HoustonA.I. (2002).The sexual selection continuum. —Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B: Biol. Sci.269:1331-1340.
KokkoH.,BrooksR.,JennionsM.D.,MorleyJ. (2003).The evolution of mate choice and mating biases. —Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B: Biol. Sci.270:653-664.
KokkoH.,JennionsM.D.,BrooksR. (2006).Unifying and testing models of sexual selection. —Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst.37:43-66.
KraaijeveldK.,Kraaijeveld-SmitF.J.,MaanM.E. (2011).Sexual selection and speciation: the comparative evidence revisited. —Biol. Rev. Camb. Philos. Soc.86:367-377.
KvarnemoC.,SimmonsL.W. (2013).Polyandry as a mediator of sexual selection before and after mating. —Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. B368:20120042.
MachadoG.,Macías-OrdóñezG. (2007).Reproduction. — In:Harvestmen: the biology of Opiliones (Pinto-da-RochaR.,MachadoG.,GiribetG., eds).Harvard University Press,Cambridge, MA, p. 414-454.
Macías-OrdóñezR. (1997). The mating system ofLeiobunum vittatum Say 1821 (Arachnida: Opiliones: Palpatores): resource defense polygyny in the striped harvestman. — PhD thesis, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA.
Macías-OrdóñezR. (2000).Touchy harvestmen. —Nat. Hist.109:58-67.
Macías-OrdóñezR.,MachadoG.,Pérez-GonzálezA.,ShultzA.W. (2010).Genitalic evolution in Opiliones. — In:The evolution of primary sexual character in animals (LeonardJ.,Cordoba-AguilarA., eds).Oxford University Press,Oxford.
MagnhagenC. (1991).Predation risk as a cost of reproduction. —Trends Ecol. Evol.6:183-185.
MagurranA.E.,SeghersB.H. (1994).A cost of sexual harassment in the guppyPoecilia reticulata. —Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B: Biol. Sci.258:89-92.
McGheeC.R. (1970). The sacculate and lanceolate groups of the genus Leiobunum (Arachnida; Phalangida, Phalangiidae) in the Eastern United States. — PhD dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA.
MoraG. (1990).Parental care in a neotropical harvestman,Zygopachylus albomarginis (Arachnida: Gonyleptidae). —Anim. Behav.39:582-593.
ParkerG.A. (1970).Sperm competition and its evolutionary consequences in the insects. —Biol. Rev.45:525-567.
ParkerG.A. (2006).Sexual conflict over mating and fertilization: an overview. —Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. B361:235-259.
ParkerG.A.,SimmonsL.W. (1989).Nuptial feeding in insects: theoretical models of male and female interests. —Ethology82:3-26.
Pinto-da-RochaR.,MachadoG.,GiribetG. (2007).Harvestmen: the biology of Opiliones. —Harvard University Press,Cambridge, MA.
PrestonB.T.,StevensonI.R.,PembertonJ.M.,ColtmanD.W.,WilsonK. (2003).Overt and covert competition in a promiscuous mammal: the importance of weaponry and testes size to male reproductive success. —Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B: Biol. Sci.270:633-640.
RequenaG.S.,MachadoG. (2014).Mating behavior of a Neotropical arachnid with exclusive paternal care. —Acta Ethol.17:23-30.
RoweL.,ArnqvistG.,SihA.,KrupaJ. (1994).Sexual conflict and the evolutionary ecology of mating patterns: water striders as a model system. —Trends Ecol. Evol.9:289-293.
RoweL.,WestlakeK.P.,CurrieD.C. (2006).Functional significance of elaborate secondary sexual traits and their evolution in the water strider genus Rheumatobates. —Can. Entomol.138:568-577.
ShultzJ.W. (2005).Preliminary analysis of mating inLeiobunum nigripes (Opiliones) and diversification of male reproductive structures inLeiobunum. —Am. Arachnol.72:11.
SimmonsL.W. (1990).Nuptial feeding in Tettigoniids: male costs and the rates of fecundity increase. —Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol.27:43-47.
SimmonsL.W. (2001).Sperm competition and its evolutionary consequences in the insects. —Princeton University Press,Princeton, NJ.
StålhandskeP. (2001).Nuptial gift in the spiderPisaura mirabilis maintained by sexual selection. —Behav. Ecol.12:691-697.
ThornhillR. (1976).Sexual selection and paternal investment in insects. —Am. Nat.110:153-163.
WatsonP.J.,ArnqvistG.,StallmannR.R. (1998).Sexual conflict and the energetic costs of mating and mate choice in water striders. —Am. Nat.151:46-58.
WijnhovenH. (2011).Notes on the biology of the unidentified invasive harvestmanLeiobunum sp. (Arachnida: Opiliones). —Arachnol. Mitt.41:17-30.
WillemartR.H.,FarineJ.P.,PerettiA.V.,GnaspiniP. (2006).Behavioral roles of the sexually dimorphic structures in the male harvestman,Phalangium opilio (Opiliones, Phalangiidae). —Can. J. Zool.84:1763-1774.
WillemartR.H.,OssesF.,CheliniM.C.,Macías-OrdóñezR.,MachadoG. (2009).Sexually dimorphic legs in a neotropical harvestman (Arachnida, Opiliones): ornament or weapon? —Behav. Proc.80:51-59.
ZatzC.,WerneckR.M.,Macías-OrdóñezG.,MachadoG. (2011).Alternative mating tactics in dimorphic males of the harvestmanLongiperna concolor (Arachnida: Opiliones). —Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol.65:995-1005.
ZhongW.,HuaB. (2013).Mating behaviour and copulatory mechanism in the ScorpionflyNeopanorpa longiprocessa (Mecoptera: Panorpidae). —PLoS One8:e74781.
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 891 | 224 | 49 |
Full Text Views | 233 | 9 | 0 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 88 | 10 | 0 |
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
When mating interactions are influenced by multiple sources of selection, they may involve multiple stages of mate assessment. At each stage, a different set of morphological and behavioural traits may be important in determining the outcome of the interaction. Here, we test the potential for multiple sources of selection to shape mating interactions inLeiobunum vittatum harvestmen, commonly known as ‘daddy longlegs’. We provide a qualitative and quantitative study of mating interactions, and investigate the influence of multiple morphological traits on each of several distinct stages of their mating interactions. Mating interactions start with a struggle between males and females during which the male attempts to secure the females in a mating embrace. Success at this stage depends on the length of the male’s clasping pedipalps: those with shorter pedipalps (and thus greater mechanical advantage) were more successful. Male size relative to the female determines how quickly males achieve this embrace. Mating interactions then proceed to tactile exchanges between males and females, indicating the potential for mutual mate choice and/or peri- and post-copulatory selection. We found no morphological predictors of the timing of these later stages of the mating interactions, and suggest that the exchange of a nuptial gift is important for the dynamics of these stages. Overall, our results highlightL. vittatum as a potentially highly informative group for studying how traits involved in mating are shaped by the interaction of selection across multiple stages in mating interactions.
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 891 | 224 | 49 |
Full Text Views | 233 | 9 | 0 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 88 | 10 | 0 |
Terms and Conditions | Privacy Statement | Cookie Settings | Accessibility | Legal Notice | Sitemap | Copyright © 2016-2025