Advertisement

Journal of Ethology

, Volume 24, Issue 2, pp 103–109 | Cite as

Ritual behaviors associated with spermatophore transfer in Deuterosminthurus bicinctus (Collembola: Bourletiellidae)

  • Marek Wojciech Kozlowski
  • Shi Aoxiang
Video Article

Abstract

The springtail Deuterosminthurus bicinctus, similarly to other members of Bourletiellidae, use their antennae, legs or heads to monopolize, stimulate, and direct female partners to spermatophores. The mating behavior of this species was examined by analysis of video recordings made on the leaves of its host plant. The characteristic stages of the behavioral sequence leading to sperm transfer were (1) preliminary courtship, highly variable in time and intensity—a male (rarely a female) endeavors to recruit a partner for further courtship, (2) push-and-retreat ritual—a rigid and rhythmical head-to-head “dance” of both partners, composed of some 180 phases and interspersed by several (3) “free turns” of a male and ended by (4) spermatophore deposition in front of a female, followed by stimulation of a female by a male to walk over the spermatophore, (5) spermatophore pick-up by a female with her gonopore, or alternately, (6) total spermatophore consumption by a female, as happened in 29% of the observed pairs. The mating ended always with (7) competition by both partners for the consumption of spermatophore residuals, usually won by the female. Comparison of mating elements and morphological features of partners engaged in mating sessions that ended either with spermatophore pick-up or consumption did not reveal any substantial differences. This suggests that changes in female motivation (hunger, state of impregnation) may be crucial for the male success in sperm transfer to a female. A digital video image is available at http://www.momo-p.com/showdetail-e.php?movieid=momo040414db01a.

Keywords

Springtails Deuterosminthurus bicinctus Bourletiellidae Mating Spermatophore transfer Spermatophore consumption 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Our debt is due to Gerhard Bretfeld, Steve P. Hopkin, Nick Birch and an anonymous reviewer who all critically discussed essential topics in our work as well as to Majka Sterzynska who directed us to valuable literature sources.

References

  1. Alexander RD, Marschal DC, Cooley JR (1997) Evolutionary perspectives in insect mating. In: Choe JC, Crespi BJ (eds) The evolution of mating systems in insects and arachnids. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 4–31Google Scholar
  2. Betsch-Pinot M-C (1977) Les parades sexuelles primitives chez les Collemboles Symphypleones. Rev Ecol Biol Soc 14:15–29Google Scholar
  3. Blancquaert J-P (1981) Mating behaviour in some Sminthuridae (Collembola) with reference to the systematics of Symphypleona. Paleobiology 22:1–4Google Scholar
  4. Bretfeld G (1970) Grundzüge des Paarungsverhaltens europäischer Bourletiellini (Collembola, Smirthuridae) und daraus abgeleitete taxonomischnomenklatorische Folgerungen. Z Zool Syst Evol Forsch 8:259–273Google Scholar
  5. Bretfeld G (1976a) Hetrosminthurus chaetocephalus (Collembola) Balz und Spermaübertragung. Encycl Cinematogr E 2252:3–10Google Scholar
  6. Bretfeld G (1976b) Der Zyclus von Häutung, Paarung und Eiablage bei den Weibchen von Heterosminthurus insignis (Reuter 1876) (Collembola, Symphypleona). Rev Ecol Biol Sol 14:1–13Google Scholar
  7. Bretfeld G (1999) Synopses on Palearctic Collembolla Symphypleona. Abh Ber Naturkundemus Goerliz 71:1–318Google Scholar
  8. Gols R, Ernsting G, van Straalen NM (2004) Paternity analysis in a hexapod (Orchesella cincta; Collembola) with indirect sperm transfer. J Insect Behav 17:317–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gwyne DT (1997) The evolution of edible “sperm sac” and other forms of courtship feeding in crickets, katydids and their kin (Orthoptera: Ensifera). In: Choe JC, Crespi BJ (eds) The evolution of mating systems in insects and arachnids. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 110–129Google Scholar
  10. Hopkin SP (1997) Biology of the springtails (Insecta: Collembola). Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  11. Parker GA (1979) Sexual selection and sexual conflict. In: Blum NS, Blum NA (eds) Sexual selection and reproductive competition in insects. Academic Press, New York, pp 123–166Google Scholar
  12. Proctor HC (1998) Indirect sperm transfer in arthropods: behavioral and evolutionary trends. Annu Rev Entomol 43:153–174CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Stam E, Isaaks A, Ernsting G (2002) Distant lovers: spermatophore deposition and destruction behavior by male springtails. J Insect Behav 15:253–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Temmbrock G (1982) Specielle Verhaltensbiologie der Tiere Band I: Funktionkreise Wirbellose. VEB Gustav Fischer Verlag, JenaGoogle Scholar
  15. Thornhill R (1986) Relative parental contribution of the sexes to their offspring and the operation of sexual selection In: Nitecki MH, Kotchell JA (eds) Evolution of animal behavior. Paleontological and field approaches. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 113–135Google Scholar
  16. Thornhill R, Alcock J (1983) The evolution of insect mating systems. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  17. Tinbergen N (1989) The study of instinct. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  18. Trivers RL (1972) Parental investment and sexual selection. In: Campbell B (ed) Sexual selection and the descent of man 1871-1971. Aldine, Chicago, pp 136–179Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Japan Ethological Society and Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Applied EntomologyWarsaw Agricultural University SGGWWarsawPoland

Personalised recommendations