Advertisement

Evolutionary Ecology

, Volume 4, Issue 1, pp 57–61 | Cite as

Mate detection success of maleClethrionomys rufocanus in relation to the spatial distribution of sexually receptive females

  • Rolf Anker Ims
Papers

Summary

Mate detection success of male grey-sided voles,Clethrionomys rufocanus, in relation to the spatial distribution of sexually receptive females was studied in an experimental island population. The spatiotemporal distribution of receptive females was controlled by containing females in small, mobile wire-mesh cages, whereas the response by free-ranging males was monitored by means of radiotelemetry. Males were on average more successful in finding oestrous females when females were spatially clumped than when females were spatially overdispersed. In addition, the variance (CV) in male mate detecting success was highest when females had an overdispersed spatial distribution. These results are consistent with predictions from a theoretical model (Ims, 1988b) analysing the effect of mate distribution on male mating success, and with empirical results on prey detection success of predators searching for prey.

Keywords

Mate searching spatial distribution of mates mate detection success area restricted search 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Eisenberg, J. F. (1981)The mammalian radiation. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  2. Emlen, S. T. and Oring, L. W. (1977) Ecology, sexual selection, and the evolution of mating systems.Science 197, 215–23.Google Scholar
  3. Ims, R. A. (1987) Male spacing systems in microtine rodents.Amer. Natur. 130, 475–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ims, R. A. (1988a) The potential for sexual selection in males: effects of sex ratio and spatiotemporal distribution of receptive females.Evol. Ecol. 3, 338–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ims, R. A. (1988b) Spatial clumping of sexually receptive females induces space sharing among male voles.Nature 335, 541–3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Kawata, M. (1985) Mating system and reproductive success in a spring population of the red-backed vole,Clethrionomys rufocanus bedfordiae. Oikos 45, 181–90.Google Scholar
  7. Kawata, M. (1988) Mating success, spatial organization, and male characteristics in experimental field populations of the red-backed vole,Clethrionomys rufocanus bedfordiae.J. Anim. Ecol. 57, 217–35.Google Scholar
  8. McFarlane, J. D. and Taylor, J. M. (1982) Nature of oestrus and ovulation inMicrotus townsendii.J. Mamm. 63, 104–9.Google Scholar
  9. Parker, G. A. (1978) Searching for mates. InBehavioural Ecology: an Evolutionary Approach (J. R. Krebs and N. B. Davies, eds) pp. 30–61. Blackwell Scientific, Oxford.Google Scholar
  10. Schwagmeyer, P. L. and Woontner, S. J., (1986) Scramble competition polygyny in the thirteen-lined ground squirrel: the relative contribution of overt conflict and competitive mate searching.Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 19, 359–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Schwagmeyer, P. L. and Parker, G. A. (1987) Queueing for mates in thirteen-lined ground squirrels.Anim. Behav. 35, 1115–25.Google Scholar
  12. Sih, A. (1982) Optimal patch use: variation in selective pressure for efficient foraging.Amer. Natur.,120, 666–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Taylor, R. J. (1984)Predation. Chapman and Hall, London and New York.Google Scholar
  14. Thornhill, R. and Alcock, J. (1983)The evolution of insect mating systems. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, USA.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Chapman and Hall Ltd. 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rolf Anker Ims
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of Zoology, Department of BiologyUniversity of OsloOslo 3Norway

Personalised recommendations