Journal of Ethology

, Volume 25, Issue 2, pp 195–199 | Cite as

Body size and fat reserves as possible predictors of male territorial status and contest outcome in the butterfly Eumaeus toxea Godart (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae)

  • Norma Martínez-Lendech
  • Alex Córdoba-Aguilar
  • Martín A. Serrano-Meneses
Article

Abstract

We used adults of the butterfly Eumaeus toxea for two purposes—description of male territorial behavior and investigation of whether body size and muscle fat reserves correlated with social status (resident or intruder) and the probability of winning a territorial contest in dyadic encounters. Males perched in places near cycads (Zamia furfuracea), where females lay eggs. Resident males (those with faithfulness to the same site for several days) used two types of flight of different duration, short (ca. 5 s) and long (ca. 17 s), against male conspecifics. Because of this difference the latter were regarded as true contests. Males that copulated were residents and were also larger than males not observed in copulation. Residents and winners of contests were larger and fatter than intruders (males entering the site that faced a resident with a long-lasting flight) and losers of contests, respectively, possibly because these last two categories of male were individuals with already exhausted energy stores. Body size and fat reserves seemed to correlate with status for resident and intruder males but not for winner and loser males. This possibly means that body size reflects male energy condition. This is supported by the fact that large, resident males are confronted in short contests, in contrast with small, resident males. Our study suggests that the role of size and fat reserves during contests cannot be discounted in butterflies.

Keywords

Eumaeus toxea Male contests Fat reserves Body size 

Notes

Acknowledgments

To one anonymous reviewer and K. Ueda for their splendid suggestions, to Iván Sánchez-Barrera for his help in the field, and to Allari Romo Beltrán and Iliana Solares Leal for sharing some data on male fighting duration.

References

  1. Andersson M (1994) Sexual selection. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  2. Anholt BR, Marden JH, Jenkins DM (1991) Patterns of mass gain in adult odonates. Can J Zool 69:1156–1163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cordero C, Soberón J (1990) Non-resource based territoriality in males of the butterfly Xamia xamia (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae). J Insect Behav 3:719–732CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Darwin C (1871) The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex. Murray, LondonGoogle Scholar
  5. Karlsson B (1994) Feeding habits and change of body composition with age in three nymphalid butterfly species. Oikos 69:224–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Kemp DJ (2000) Contest behavior in the speckled wood butterfly: does size matter? Behav Ecol 11:591–596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Kemp DJ (2002) Butterfly contests and flight physiology: why do older males fight harder? Behav Ecol 13:456–461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kemp DJ, Wiklund C (2001) Fighting without weaponry: a review of male–male contest competition in butterflies. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 49:429–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kemp DJ, Alcock J (2003) Lifetime resource utilization, flight physiology, and the evolution of contest competition in territorial insects. Am Nat 162:290–301PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kemp DJ, Wiklund C (2004) Residency effects in animal contests. Proc R Soc Lond ser B 271:1707–1711CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kemp DJ, Wiklund C, Van Dyck H (2006) Contest behaviour in the speckled wood butterfly (Pararge argeria): seasonal phenotypic plasticity and the functional significance of flight performance. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 59:403–411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Marden JH (2000) Variability in the size, composition and function of insect flight muscles. Ann Rev Physiol 62:157–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Marden JH, Waage JK (1990) Escalated damselfly territorial contests are energetic wars of attrition. Anim Behav 39:954–959CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Moore AJ (1990) The evolution of sexual dimorphism by sexual selection: the separate effects of intrasexual selection and intersexual selection. Evolution 44:315–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Otronen M (1988) The effect of body size on the outcome of fights in burying beetles (Nicrophorus). Ann Zool Fenn 25:191–201Google Scholar
  16. Plaistow JS, Siva-Jothy MT (1996) Energetic constrains and male mate-securing tactics in the damselfly Calopteryx splendens xanthostoma (Charpenter). Proc R Soc Lond Ser B 263:1233–1239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Rosenberg RH, Enquist M (1991) Contest behavior in Weidermeyer’s admiral butterfly Limenitis weidemeyerii (Nymphalidae): the effects of size and residency. Anim Behav 42:805–811CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Schneider D, Wink M, Sporer F, Lounibos P (2002) Cycads: their evolution, toxins, herbivores and insect pollinators. Naturwissenschaften 89:281–294PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Solares Leal I, Romo Beltrán AN (2001) Ciclo biológico de Eumaeus toxea Godart. (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) sobre Zamia furfuracea L. (Zamiaceae). Bachelor thesis. Universidad de las Américas-Puebla, MexicoGoogle Scholar
  20. Stutt AD, Willmer P (1998) Territorial defence in speckled wood butterflies: do the hottest males always win? Anim Behav 55:1341–1347PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Takeuchi T (2006) The effect of morphology and physiology on butterfly territoriality. Behaviour 143:393–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Japan Ethological Society and Springer 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Norma Martínez-Lendech
    • 1
  • Alex Córdoba-Aguilar
    • 1
  • Martín A. Serrano-Meneses
    • 1
  1. 1.Departamento de Ecología Evolutiva, Instituto de EcologíaUniversidad Nacional Autónoma de MéxicoMexico, DFMexico

Personalised recommendations