Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 29, Issue 4, pp 235–247 | Cite as

The morphology and behavior of dimorphic males in Perdita portalis (Hymenoptera : Andrenidae)

  • Bryan N. Danforth
Article

Summary

In Perdita portalis, a ground nesting, communal bee, males are clearly dimorphic. The two male morphs are easily distinguished based on head size and shape into (1) a flight-capable, small-headed (SH) morph that resembles the males of other closely related species and (2) a flightless, large-headed (LH) morph that possesses numerous derived traits, such as reduced compound eyes, enlarged facial foveae and fully atrophied indirect flight muscles. The SH morph occurs exclusively on flowers while the LH morph is found only in nests with females. While on flowers, SH males are aggressive, fighting with conspecific males and heterospecific male and female bees, and they mate frequently with foraging females. Using artificial observation nests placed in the field, I observed the behavior of females and LH males within their subterranean nests. LH males are aggressive fighters; males attacked each other with mandibles agape, and male-male fights always ended in the death of one male. LH males are highly attentive to the reproductive behavior of females; they spend increasing amounts of time near open cells during cell provisioning, and mating only takes place immediately prior to oviposition when females are forming the accumulated pollen and nectar into a ball. Based on larvae reared to adulthood in the laboratory, the two male morphs occur in equal proportions. The behavior of males in closely related species, especially P. texana, and the origin and maintenance of male dimorphism are discussed.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abrams J, Eickwort GC (1981) Nest switching and guarding by the communal sweat bee Agapostemon virescens (Hymenoptera, Halictidae). Insectes Soc 28:105–116Google Scholar
  2. Alcock J, Jones CE, Buchmann SL (1977) Male mating strategies in the bee Centris pallida Fox (Anthophoridae: Hymenoptera). Am Nat 111:145–155Google Scholar
  3. Altmann J (1974) Observational study of animal behavior: sampling methods. Behavior 49:227–265Google Scholar
  4. Anderson TW (1963) Asymptotic theory for principal component analysis. Ann Math Stat 34:122–148Google Scholar
  5. Austad SN (1984) A classification of alternative reproductive behaviors and methods for field-testing ESS models. Am Zool 23:309–319Google Scholar
  6. Bartz SH (1982) On the evolution of male workers in the hymenoptera. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 11:223–228Google Scholar
  7. Batra SWT (1964) Behavior of the social bee, Lasioglossum zephyrum, within the nest (Hymenoptera: Halictidae). Insectes Soc 11:159–185Google Scholar
  8. Batra SWT (1968) Behavior of some social and solitary halictine bees within their nests: a comparative study. J Kans Entomol Soc 41:120–133Google Scholar
  9. Bennett B, Breed MD (1985) The nesting biology, mating behavior, and foraging ecology of Perdita opuntiae (Hymenoptera: Andrenidae). J Kans Entomol Soc 58:185–194Google Scholar
  10. Brockmann HJ, Grafen A (1989) Mate conflict and male behaviour in a solitary wasp, Trypoxylon (Trypargilum) politum (Hymenoptera: Sphecidae). Anim Behav 37:232–255Google Scholar
  11. Brothers DJ, Michener CD (1974) Interactions in colonies of primitively social bees III. Ethometry and division of labor in Lasioglossum zephyrum (Hymenoptera: Halictidae). J Comp Physiol 90:129–168Google Scholar
  12. Cowan DP (1981) Parental investment in two solitary wasps Ancistrocerus adiabatus and Euodynerus foraminatus. Behav Soc Sociobiol 9:95–102Google Scholar
  13. Crespi BJ (1988) Adaptation, compromise and constraint: the development, morphometrics, and behavioral basis of a fighterflier polymorphism in male Hoplothrips karnyi (Insecea: Thysanoptera). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 23:93–104Google Scholar
  14. Cross EA, Mostafa A E-S, Bauman TR, Lancaster IJ (1978) Some aspects of energy transfer between the organ pipe mud-dauber Trypoxylon politum and its araneid spider prey. Environ Entomol 7:647–652Google Scholar
  15. Custer CP (1928) The bee that works stone; Perdita opuntiae Cockerell. Psyche 35:67–84Google Scholar
  16. Danforth BN (1989) Nesting behavior of four species of Perdita (Hymenoptera: Andrenidae). J Kans Entomol Soc 62:59–79Google Scholar
  17. Danforth BN (1990) Provisioning behavior and the estimation of investment ratios in a solitary bee, Calliopsis (Hypomacrotera) persimilis (Cockerell) (Hymenoptera: Andrenidae). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 27:159–168Google Scholar
  18. Dawkins R (1980) Good strategy or evolutionarily stable strategy? In: Barlow GW, Silverberg J (eds) Sociobiology: beyond nature/nurture? Westview, Boulder, pp 331–367Google Scholar
  19. Dominey WJ (1984) Alternative mating tactics and evolutionarily stable strategies. Am Nat 24:385–396Google Scholar
  20. Dow R (1942) The relationship of the prey of Sphecius speciosus to the size and sex of the adult wasp. Ann Entomol Soc Am 35:310–317Google Scholar
  21. Eberhard WG (1982) Beetle horn dimorphism: making the best of a bad lot. Am Nat 119:420–426Google Scholar
  22. Eickwort GC, Ginsberg HS (1980) Foraging and mating behavior in Apoidea. Annu Rev Entomol 25:421–466Google Scholar
  23. Fisher RA (1958) The genetical theory of natural selection, 2nd edn. Dover, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  24. Hamilton WD (1979) Wingless and fighting males in fig wasps and other insects. In: Blum MS, Blum NA (eds) Sexual selection and reproductive competition in insects. Academic Press, New York, pp 167–220Google Scholar
  25. Holmes HG (1974) Patterns of sperm competition in Nasonia vitripennis. Can J Genet Cytol 16:789–795Google Scholar
  26. Houston TF (1970) Discovery of an apparent male soldier caste in a nest of a halictine bee (Hymenoptera: Halictidae) with notes on the nest. Aust J Zool 18:345–351Google Scholar
  27. Huxley J (1938) Darwins theory of sexual selection. Am Nat 72:416–433Google Scholar
  28. Jayasingh DB, Taffe CA (1982) The biology of the eumenid mudwasp Pachyodynerus nasidens in trapnests. Ecol Entomol 7:283–289Google Scholar
  29. Jolicoeur P (1963b) The multivariate generalization of the allometric equation. Biometrics 19:497–499Google Scholar
  30. Kinomura K, Yamauchi K (1987) Fighting and mating behaviors of dimorphic males in the ant Cardiocondyla wroughtoni. J Ethol 5:75–81Google Scholar
  31. Klostermeyer EC, Mech SJ Jr, Rasmussen WB (1973) Sex and weight of Megachile rotundata (Hymenoptera: Megachilidae) progeny associated with provision weights. J Kans Entom Soc 46:536–548Google Scholar
  32. Kukuk PF, Schwarz M (1987) Intranest behavior of the communal sweat bee Lasioglossum (Chilalictus) erythrurum (Hymenoptera: Halictidae). J Kans Entomol Soc 60:58–64Google Scholar
  33. Kukuk PF, Schwarz M (1988) Macrocephalic male bees as functional reproductives and probable guards. Pan-Pac Entomol 64:131–137Google Scholar
  34. LaBarbera M (1989) Analyzing body size as a factor in ecology and evolution. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 20:97–117Google Scholar
  35. Metcalf RA (1980) Sex ratios, parent-offspring conflict, and local competition for mates in the social wasps Polistes metricus and Polistes variatus. Am Nat 116:642–654Google Scholar
  36. Michener CD, Brothers DJ (1971) A simplified observation nest for burrowing bees. J Kans Entomol Soc 44:236–239Google Scholar
  37. Murray MG (1987) The closed environment of the fig receptable and its influence on male conflict in the Old World fig wasp, Philotrypesis pilosa. Anim Behav 35:488–506Google Scholar
  38. Page RE, Metcalf RA (1982) Multiple mating, sperm utilization, and social evolution. Am Nat 119:263–281Google Scholar
  39. Parker GA (1970) Sperm competition and its evolutionary consequences in insects. Biol Rev 45:525–567Google Scholar
  40. Plateaux-Quénu C (1983) Le volume dun pain d'abeille influence-til le sexe de I'oeuf pondu sur lui? Etude expérimentale portant sur la premiere couveée d'Evylaeus calceatus (Scop.) (Hymenoptera, Halictidae). Ann Sci Nat Zool 5:41–52Google Scholar
  41. Plowright RC, Jay SC (1977) On the size determination of bumble bee castes (Hymenoptera: Apidae). Can J Zool 55:1133–1138Google Scholar
  42. Rozen JG Jr (1970) Department of entomology report 102. Annu Rep Am Mus Nat Hist 102:4–5Google Scholar
  43. Rutowski RL, Alcock J (1980) Temporal variation in male copulatory behavior in the solitary bee Nomadopsis puellae (Hymenoptera: Andrenidae). Behaviour 73:175–188Google Scholar
  44. Shinn AF (1967) A revision of the bee genus Calliopsis and the biology and ecology of C. andreniformis (Hymenoptera: Andrenidae). Univ Kans Sci Bull 46:753–936Google Scholar
  45. Snodgrass RE (1956) Anatomy of the honey bee. Comstock, Ithaca LondonGoogle Scholar
  46. Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1981) Biometry, 2nd edn. Freeman, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  47. Starr CK (1984) Sperm competition, kinship and sociality in the aculeate Hymenoptera: In: Smith RL (ed) Sperm competition and the evolution of animal mating systems. Academic Press, Orlando, pp 428–464Google Scholar
  48. Stockhammer KA (1966) Nesting habits and life cycle of a sweat bee, Augochlora pura. J Kans Entomol Soc 39:157–192Google Scholar
  49. Stuart RJ, Francoeur A, Loiselle R (1987a) Fighting males in the ant genus Cardiocondyla. In: Eder J, Rembold H (eds) Chemistry and biology of social insects (Proceedings of the Tenth International Congress of the International Union for the Study of Social Insects, Munich, 1986). Peperny, Munich, pp 551–552Google Scholar
  50. Stuart RJ, Francoeur A, Loiselle R (1987b) Lethal fighting among dimorphic males of the ant, Cardiocondyla wroughtoni. Naturwissenschaften 74:548–549Google Scholar
  51. Timberlake PH (1954) A revisional study of the bees in the genus Perdita F. Smith with special reference to the fauna of the Pacific coast (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) I. Univ Calif Publ Entomol 9:345–432Google Scholar
  52. Timberlake PH (1968) A revisional study of the bees in the genus Perdita F. Smith with special reference to the fauna of the Pacific coast (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) VII. Univ Calif Publ Entomol 49:1–196Google Scholar
  53. Wilkes A (1966) Sperm utilization following multiple insemination in the wasp Dahlbominus fuscipennis. Can J Genet Cytol 8:451–461Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bryan N. Danforth
    • 1
  1. 1.Snow Entomological Museum, Department of EntomologyUniversity of KansasLawrenceUSA
  2. 2.Department of Entomology, National Museum of Natural HistorySmithsonian InstitutionWashingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations