Mate choice in field crickets: can females acoustically detect male body size?
- First Online:
- 209 Downloads
Females can potentially choose high-quality males by evaluating male secondary sexual traits such as acoustic signals. In field crickets (Orthoptera: Gryllidae), body size is thought to indicate male quality. Song carrier frequency (FQ) has been suggested to indicate male body size because the areas of the wing that control FQ (harp) scale with body size. However, no direct evidence showing that males can advertise their size via FQ exists for grylline crickets. Firstly, we show the lack of evidence indicating a clear relationship between FQ and body size for grylline crickets by conducting a literature review. We then calculate the three-way relationship between body size, harp size and FQ and show no relationship between FQ and body size for Gryllus bimaculatus. Eight other commonly measured song parameters also failed to indicate body size. Individual female preference functions for FQ are calculated and we demonstrate that females cannot select large males on the basis of FQ. Furthermore, we demonstrate that variation in male FQ falls within the range of female preference at the population level. Females probably cannot evaluate male body size based on the temporal and spectral properties of male calling song and alternative avenues of study are suggested.
KeywordsBody size Female preference Gryllus bimaculatus Harp size Mate choice Song frequency Spectral bandwidth
- Andersson M (1994) Sexual selection. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
- Batschelet E (1981) Circular statistics in biology. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Becker WA (1984) Manual of quantitative genetics, 4th edn. Academic Enterprises, PullmanGoogle Scholar
- Bennet-Clark HC (1989) Songs and the physics of sound production. In: Huber F, Moore TE, Loher W (eds) Cricket behavior and neurobiology. Cornell University Press, IthacaGoogle Scholar
- Birkhead TR, Møller AP (1998) Sperm competition and sexual selection. Academic Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
- Gerhardt HC, Huber F (2002) Acoustic communication in insects and anurans: common problems and diverse solutions. The University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
- Parker GA (1983) Mate quality and mating decisions. In: Bateson P (ed) Mate choice. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp 141–166Google Scholar
- Schildberger K, Huber F, Wohlers DW (1989) Central auditory pathway: neuronal correlates of phonotactic behavior. In: Huber F, Moore TE, Loher W (eds) Cricket behavior and neurobiology. Cornell University Press, IthacaGoogle Scholar
- Simmons LW (1992) Sexual selection and body size in a natural population of the field cricket. Gryllus campestris (L). J Orthop Res 1:12–13Google Scholar