Advertisement

Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 25, Issue 4, pp 275–281 | Cite as

Female choice of large males in the treefrog Hyla chrysoscelis: the importance of identifying the scale of choice

  • Molly R. Morris
Article

Summary

In this study, I detected the presence of female choice for larger males in the treefrog Hyla chrysoscelis. Mated males were larger than unmated males at the scales females could have assessed males: local groups (males found within 2 meters of a mated pair) and the nightly chorus. In addition, females were observed to initiate amplexus with the larger males in local groups. Mated males were larger than unmated males for two of the four seasons studied. Seasonal mating success was also analyzed with a multiple regression model that included size and chorus attendance (nights spent at the breeding site). The partial selection coefficients, which represent the relative magnitude of directional selection, were significant for size in only one season and for chorus attendance in all four seasons. Therefore, there are two possible advantages to being a large male: increased likelihood of obtaining a mate due to female preference, and increased likelihood of mating even if no female preference because of a greater number of opportunities to obtain a mating if matings occurred at random.

Keywords

Regression Model Relative Magnitude Multiple Regression Model Mating Success Breeding Site 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Arak A (1983a) Male-male competition and mate choice in anuran amphibians. In: Bateson P (ed) Mate Choice, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp 181–210Google Scholar
  2. Arak A (1983b) Sexual selection by male-male competition in natterjack toad choruses. Nature 306:261–262Google Scholar
  3. Arnold SJ, Wade MJ (1984) On the measurement of natural and sexual selection: Theory Evolution 38:709–719Google Scholar
  4. Davies NB, Halliday TR (1979) Competitive mate searching in male common toads, Bufo bufo. Anim Behav 27:1253–1267Google Scholar
  5. Emlen ST, Oring LW (1977) Ecology, sexual selection, and the evolution of mating systems. Science 1977:215–223Google Scholar
  6. Endler JA (1986) Natural selection in the wild. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  7. Fairchild L (1981) Mate selection and behavioral thermoregulation in Fowler's Toad. Science 212:950–951Google Scholar
  8. Fellers GM (1979) Mate selection in the gray treefrog, Hyla versicolor. Copeia 1979:286–290Google Scholar
  9. Gatz AJ Jr (1981) Size selective mating in Hyla versicolor and Hyla crucifer. J Herpetol 15:114–116Google Scholar
  10. Gerhardt HC, Daniel RE, Perrill SA, Schramm S (1987) Mating Behaviour and success in the green treefrog. Anim Behav 35:1490–1503Google Scholar
  11. Given MF (1988) Growth rate and the cost of calling activity in male carpenter frogs, Rana virgatipes. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 22:153–160Google Scholar
  12. Godwin GJ, Robel SM (1983) Mating success in male treefrogs, Hyla chrysoscelis (Anura: Hylidae). Herpetologica 39:141–146Google Scholar
  13. Greer BJ, Wells KD (1980) Territorial and reproductive behavior in a centrolenid frog Centrolenella fleischmanni. Herpetologica 36:318–326Google Scholar
  14. Howard RD (1978) The evolution of mating strategies in bullfrogs, Rana catesbeiana. Evolution 32:850–871Google Scholar
  15. Howard RD (1980) Mating behavior and mating success in woodfrogs, Rana sylvatica. Anim Behav 28:705–716Google Scholar
  16. Howard RD (1988) Sexual selection on male body size and mating behaviour in American toads, Bufo americanus. Anim Behav 36:1796–1808Google Scholar
  17. Howard RD, Kluge AG (1985) Proximate mechanisms of sexual selection in wood frogs. Evolution 39:260–277Google Scholar
  18. Kluge AG (1981) The life history, social organization, and parental behavior of Hyla rosenbergi Boulenger, a nest-building gladiator frog. Misc Publ Mus Zool, Univ of Michigan, no 160Google Scholar
  19. Koenig WD, Albano SS (1985) On the measurement of sexual selection. Am Nat 127:403–409Google Scholar
  20. Lande R, Arnold SJ (1983) The measurement of selection on correlated characters. Evolution 37:1210–1226Google Scholar
  21. Morris MR, Yoon SL (1989) A Mechanism for female choice of large males in the treefrog Hyla chrysoscelis. Behav Ecol Socio 24Google Scholar
  22. Perril SA, Gerhardt HC, Daniel R (1978) Sexual parasitism in the green treefrog (Hyla cineria). Science 200:1179–1180Google Scholar
  23. Pianka ER, Parker WS (1975) Age-specific reproductive tactics. Amer Natur 109:453–464Google Scholar
  24. Robertson JGM (1986) Female choice, male strategies and the role of vocalizations in the Australian frog Uperoleia rugosa. Anim Behav 34:773–784Google Scholar
  25. Ryan MJ (1980) Female mate choice in a neotropical frog. Science 209:523–525Google Scholar
  26. Ryan MJ (1983) Sexual Selection and Communication in a Neotropical frog Physalaemus pustulosus. Evolution 37:261–272Google Scholar
  27. Trivers RL (1972) Parental investment and sexual selection. In: Campbell BG (ed) Sexual Selection and the Descent of Man, Aldine, Chicago, pp 136–179Google Scholar
  28. Wells KD (1979) Reproductive behavior and male mating success in a neotropical toad, Bufo typhionus. Biotropica 11:301–307Google Scholar
  29. Wells KD, Schwartz JJ (1984) Vocal communication in a neotropical treefrog, Hyla ebraccata: advertisement calls. Anim Behav 32:405Google Scholar
  30. Wittenberger JF (1983) Tactics of mate choice. In: Bateson P (ed) Mate Choice, Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  31. Woodward BD (1982) Male persistence and mating success in Woodhouse's toad (Bufo woodhousei). Ecology 63:583–585Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Molly R. Morris
    • 1
  1. 1.Biology DepartmentIndiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations