Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 55, Issue 1, pp 73–79 | Cite as

Responses of female lizards, Lacerta monticola, to males' chemical cues reflect their mating preference for older males

Original Article


Female mate choice based on visual traits appears to be rare in lizards. Field observations suggest that females of the lizard Lacerta monticola preferred to mate with larger/older males. Although older males are usually green and larger, and younger males brown and smaller, there is some overlap in size and coloration between age classes. Thus, visual cues may not always be reliable indicators of a male's age. We hypothesized that female mate-choice preferences may be based on males' pheromones, which might transmit information about characteristics such as age. In a laboratory experiment, we analyzed the effect of age of males on attractiveness of their scents to females. When we offered scents of two males of different age, females associated preferentially with scents of older males. This suggested that females were able to assess the age of males by chemical signals alone, and that females preferred to be in areas scent-marked by older males. Thus, females may increase their opportunities to mate with males of high quality, or may avoid harassment by sneaking young males. This result agreed with field observations on females mating with old males, and rejection of advances by young males. Our results also suggested that female preference for older males may depend on their own body size. Large females showed a strong preference for older males, whereas smaller females were not so selective. This, together with males' preference for large females, might lead to size-assortative matings. We suggest that the quality and/or quantity of male pheromones could communicate to the female heritable male genetic quality (i.e. age) and thereby serve as the basis of adaptive female choice in lizards.


Chemoreception Lizards Female mate choice Femoral glands Male mating success 



We thank W.E. Cooper and an anonymous reviewer for helpful comments, and "El Ventorrillo" MNCN Field Station for use of their facilities. Lizards were captured under license from the "Consejería del Medio Ambiente de la Comunidad de Madrid" (Spain). Financial support was provided by the MCYT projects BOS2002-00598 and BOS2002-00547.


  1. Alberts AC (1989) Ultraviolet visual sensitivity in desert iguanas: implications for pheromone detection. Anim Behav 38:129–137Google Scholar
  2. Alberts AC (1990) Chemical properties of femoral gland secretions in the desert iguana Dipsosaurus dorsalis. J Chem Ecol 16:13–25Google Scholar
  3. Alberts AC (1992) Pheromone self-recognition in desert iguanas. Copeia 1992:229–232Google Scholar
  4. Alberts AC (1993) Chemical and behavioral studies of femoral gland secretions in iguanid lizards. Brain Behav Evol 41:255–260PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Andersson M (1994) Sexual selection. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJGoogle Scholar
  6. Aragón P (2001) Mecanismos para reducir los costes derivados de los encuentros agresivos en los machos de la lagartija serrana (Lacerta monticola). PhD Thesis, University Complutense, MadridGoogle Scholar
  7. Aragón P, López P, Martín J (2000) Size-dependent chemosensory responses to familiar and unfamiliar conspecific faecal pellets by the iberian rock-lizard, Lacerta monticola. Ethology 106:1115–1128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Aragón P, López P, Martín J (2001a) Chemosensory discrimination of familiar and unfamiliar conspecifics by lizards: implications of field spatial relationships between males. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 50:128–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Aragón P, López P, Martín J (2001b) Discrimination of femoral gland secretions from familiar and unfamiliar conspecifics by male iberian rock-lizards, Lacerta monticola. J Herpetol 35:346–350Google Scholar
  10. Aragón P, López P, Martín J (2001c) Effects of conspecific chemical cues on settlement and retreat-site selection of male lizards, Lacerta monticola. J Herpetol 35:681–684Google Scholar
  11. Aragón P, López P, Martín J (2001d) Seasonal changes in activity and spatial and social relationships of the Iberian rock-lizard Lacerta monticola. Can J Zool 79:1965–1971CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Baird TA, Timanus DK (1998) Social inhibition of territorial behaviour in yearling male collared lizards, Crotaphytus collaris. Anim Behav 56:989–994CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Baird TA, Fox SF, McCoy JK (1997) Population differences in the roles of size and coloration in intra- and intersexual selection in the collared lizard, Crotaphytus collaris: influence of habitat and social organization. Behav Ecol 8:506–517Google Scholar
  14. Bateson P (1983) Mate choice. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  15. Beck CW, Powell LA (2000) Evolution of female mate choice based on male age: are older males better males? Evol Ecol Res 2:107–118Google Scholar
  16. Braña F (1996) Sexual dimorphism in lacertid lizards: male head increase vs female abdomen increase. Oikos 75:511–523Google Scholar
  17. Breed MD, Smith SK, Gall BG (1980) Systems of mate selection in a cockroach species with male dominance hierarchies. Anim Behav 28:130–134Google Scholar
  18. Brooks R, Kemp DJ (2001) Can older males deliver the good genes? Trends Ecol Evol 6:308–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Caro TM, Bateson P (1986) Organization and ontogeny of alternative tactics. Anim Behav 34:1483–1499Google Scholar
  20. Censky EJ (1997) Female mate choice in the non-territorial lizard Ameiva plei (Teiidae). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 40:221–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cooper WE Jr (1994) Chemical discrimination by tongue-flicking in lizards: a review with hypotheses on its origin and its ecological and phylogenetic relationships. J Chem Ecol 20:439–487Google Scholar
  22. Cooper WE Jr, Vitt LJ (1984) Conspecific odor detection by the male broad-headed skink, Eumeces laticeps: effects of sex and site of odor source and of male reproductive condition. J Exp Zool 230:199–209PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Cooper WE Jr, Vitt LJ (1987) Deferred agonistic behavior in a long-lived sicincid lizard Eumeces laticeps. Oecologia 72:321–326Google Scholar
  24. Cooper WE Jr, Vitt LJ (1993) Female choice of large male broad-headed skinks. Anim Behav 45:683–693CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Dominey WI (1984) Alternative mating tactics and evolutionary stable strategies. Am Zool 24:385–396Google Scholar
  26. Drickamer LC (1992) Oestous female house mice discriminate dominant from subordinant males and sons of dominant from sons of subordinate males by odour cues. Anim Behav 43:868–870Google Scholar
  27. Elvira B, Vigal CR (1985) Further data on the reproduction of Lacerta monticola cyreni (Sauria, Lacertidae) in Central Spain. Amphib Rept 6:173–179Google Scholar
  28. Fox SF, Shipman PA (2003) Social behavior at high and low elevations: environmental release and phylogenetic effects in Liolaemus. In: Fox SF, McCoy JK, Baird TA (eds) Lizard social behavior. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, pp 310–355Google Scholar
  29. Glinsky TH, Krekorian CO'N (1985) Individual recognition in free-living adult male desert iguanas, Dipsosaurus dorsalis. J Herpetol 19:541–544Google Scholar
  30. Halpern M (1992) Nasal chemical senses in reptiles: structure and function. In: Gans C, Crews D (eds) Biology of the Reptilia, vol 18. Brain, hormones, and behavior. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 423–522Google Scholar
  31. Hews DK (1990) Examining hypotheses generated by field measures of sexual selection on male lizards, Uta palmeri. Evolution 44:1956–1966Google Scholar
  32. Kirkpatrick M (1987) Sexual selection by female choice in polygynous animals. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 18:43–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Koprowski JL (1993) Alternative reproductive tactics in male eastern grey squirrels: "making the best of a bad job". Behav Ecol 4:165–171Google Scholar
  34. López P, Martín J (2001) Pheromonal recognition of females takes precedence over the chromatic cue in male iberian wall lizards, Podarcis hispanica. Ethology 107:901–912CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. López P, Aragón P, Martín J (1998) Iberian rock lizards (Lacerta monticola cyreni) assess conspecific information using composite signals from faecal pellets. Ethology 104:809–820Google Scholar
  36. López P, Muñoz A, Martín J (2002) Symmetry, male dominance and female mate preferences in the Iberian rock-lizard, Lacerta monticola. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 52:342–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. López P, Martín J, Cuadrado M (2003) Chemosensory cues allow male lizards Psammodromus algirus to override visual concealment of sexual identity by satellite males. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 54:218–224Google Scholar
  38. Martín J, Forsman A (1999) Social costs and development of nuptial coloration in male Psammodromus algirus lizards: an experiment. Behav Ecol 10:396–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Martín J, López P (2000) Chemoreception, symmetry and mate choice in lizards. Proc R Soc Lond B 267:1265–1269PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Martín J, Salvador A (1992) Tail loss consequences on habitat use by the Iberian rock-lizard, Lacerta monticola. Oikos 65:318–324Google Scholar
  41. Martín J, Salvador A (1993) Tail loss reduces mating success in the Iberian rock-lizard. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 32:185–189Google Scholar
  42. Martín J, Salvador A (1997) Effects of tail loss on the time budgets, movements, and spacing patterns of Iberian rock lizards, Lacerta monticola. Herpetologica 53:117–125Google Scholar
  43. Mason RT (1992) Reptilian pheromones. In: Gans C, Crews D (eds) Biology of the Reptilia, vol 18. Brain, hormones, and behavior. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 114–228Google Scholar
  44. McCoy JK, Baird TA, Fox SF (2003) Sexual selection, social behavior, and the environmental potential for polygyny. In: Fox SF, McCoy JK, Baird TA (eds) Lizard social behavior. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, pp 149–171Google Scholar
  45. Møller AP, Thornhill R (1998) Bilateral symmetry and sexual selection: a meta-analysis. Am Nat 151:174–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Moore MC (1991) Application of organizational-activation theory to alternative male reproductive strategies: a review. Horm Behav 25:154–179PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Moore PJ, Reagan-Wallin NL, Haynes KF, Moore AJ (1997) Odour conveys status on cockroaches. Nature 389:25Google Scholar
  48. Moreira PL, Almeida AP, Delgado H, Salgueiro O, Crespo EG (1998) Bases para a Conservação da Lagartixa-da-montanha (Lacerta monticola). Estudos de Biologia e Conservação da Natureza, nº 25. Instituto da Conservação da Natureza, Ministerio do Ambiente, LisbonGoogle Scholar
  49. Olsson M (1993) Male preference for large females and assortative mating for body size in the sand lizard (Lacerta agilis). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 32:337–341Google Scholar
  50. Olsson M (1994) Nuptial coloration in the sand lizard, Lacerta agilis: an intra-sexually selected cue to fighting ability. Anim Behav 48:607–613CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Olsson M, Madsen T (1995) Female choice on male quantitative traits in lizards—why is it so rare? Behav Ecol Sociobiol 36:179–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Olsson M, Madsen T (1998) Sexual selection and sperm competition in reptiles. In: Birkhead TR, Møller AP (eds) Sperm competition and sexual selection. Academic, San Diego, pp 503–578Google Scholar
  53. Olsson M, Shine R (1996) How and why does reproductive success increase with age? A case study using sand lizards (Lacerta agilis). Oecologia 105:175–178Google Scholar
  54. Olsson M, Shine R (1998) Chemosensory recognition may facilitate prolonged mate guarding by snow skinks, Niveoscincus microlepidotus. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 43:359–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Osada K, Yamazaki K, Curran M, Bard J, Smith BPC, Beauchamp GK (2003) The scent of age. Proc R Soc Lond B 270:929–933PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Penn D, Potts WK (1998) Chemical signals and parasite-mediated sexual selection. Trends Ecol Evol 13:391–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Pérez-Mellado V (1982) Datos sobre Lacerta monticola Boulenger, 1905 (Sauria: Lacertidae) en el oeste del Sistema Central. Doñana Acta Vert 9:107–129Google Scholar
  58. Pérez-Mellado V (1998) Lacerta monticola Boulenger, 1905. In: Salvador A. (ed) Fauna Ibérica, vol 10. Reptiles. Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales, Madrid, pp 207–215Google Scholar
  59. Siegel S, Castellan NJ (1988) Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  60. Smith JM, Zucker N (1997) Do female tree lizards, Urosaurus ornatus, exhibit mate choice? J Herpetol 31:179–186Google Scholar
  61. Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1995) Biometry, 3rd edn. Freeman, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  62. Stamps JA (1983) Sexual selection, sexual dimorphism and territoriality. In: Huey RB, Pianka ER, Schoener TW (eds) Lizard ecology: studies of a model organism. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass, pp 169–204Google Scholar
  63. Stoddart MD (1980) The ecology of vertebrate olfaction. Chapman & Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  64. Thornhill R (1992) Female preference for the pheromone of males with low fluctuating asymmetry in the Japanese scorpionfly (Panorpa japonica: Mecoptera). Behav Ecol 3:277–283Google Scholar
  65. Tokarz RR (1995) Mate choice in lizards: a review. Herpetol Monogr 9:17–40Google Scholar
  66. Whiting MJ, Bateman, PW (1999) Male preference for large females in the lizard Platysaurus broadleyi. J Herpetol 33:309–312Google Scholar
  67. Wikelski M, Carbone C, Trillmich F (1996) Lekking in marine iguanas: female grouping and male strategies. Anim Behav 52:581–596CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Departamento de Ecología Evolutiva, Museo Nacional de Ciencias NaturalesCSICMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations