Journal of Ethology

, Volume 35, Issue 2, pp 177–185 | Cite as

Male mate choice in a sexually cannibalistic species: male escapes from hungry females in the praying mantid Tenodera angustipennis

Article

Abstract

While competing males and choosy females may be common in animal mating systems, male choice can evolve under certain conditions. Sexual cannibalism is such a condition because of the high mortality risk for males. In mantids, female body condition is associated with male mate preference, with fat females preferred, due to at least two reasons: females in poor nutritional condition are likely to attack and predate males, and fat females can potentially increase the number of offspring. Thus, the risk of cannibalism and female fecundity can influence male mating behavior. In this study, we attempted to separate these factors by using the praying mantid Tenodera angustipennis to examine whether male preference for fat female mantids was based on avoiding sexual cannibalism (cannibalism avoidance hypothesis) or preference for female fecundity (fecundity preference hypothesis). The feeding regimes were experimentally manipulated to discriminate between the effects of female fecundity and female hunger status on male and female mating behaviors. We found that recently starved females more frequently locomoted toward the male, and that male abdominal bending was less intensive and escape was sooner from recently starved females. These female and male behavioral responses to female hunger condition may reveal male avoidance of dangerous females in this mantid.

Keywords

Mate preference Mating behavior Sexual cannibalism Sexual conflict Sexual selection 

References

  1. Andersson M (1994) Sexual selection. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  2. Andrade MCB (1996) Sexual selection for male sacrifice in the Australian redback spider. Science 271:70–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Andrade MCB (1998) Female hunger can explain variation in cannibalistic behavior despite male sacrifice in redback spiders. Behav Ecol 9:33–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arnqvist G, Henriksson S (1997) Sexual cannibalism in the fishing spider and a model of the evolution of sexual cannibalism based on genetic constraint. Evol Ecol 11:255–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Arnqvist G, Rowe L (2005) Sexual conflict. Princeton University Press, PrincetonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Barry KL (2010) Influence of female nutritional status on mating dynamics in a sexually cannibalistic praying mantid. Anim Behav 80:405–411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barry KL (2013) You are what you eat: food limitation affects reproductive fitness in a sexually cannibalistic praying mantid. PLoS One 8(10):e78164CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. Barry KL (2015) Sexual deception in a cannibalistic mating system? Testing the Femme Fatale hypothesis. Proc R Soc B 282:20141428CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. Barry KL, Kokko H (2010) Male mate choice: why sequential choice can make its evolution difficult. Anim Behav 80:163–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Barry KL, Holwell GI, Herberstein ME (2008) Female praying mantids use sexual cannibalism as a foraging strategy to increase fecundity. Behav Ecol 19:710–715CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Barry KL, Holwell GI, Herberstein ME (2009) Male mating behaviour reduces the risk of sexual cannibalism in an Australian praying mantid. J Ethol 27:377–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Barry KL, Holwell GI, Herberstein ME (2010) Multimodal mate assessment by male praying mantids in a sexually cannibalistic mating system. Anim Behav 79:1165–1172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y (1995) Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J R Stat Soc B (Methodol) 57:289–300Google Scholar
  14. Birkhead TR, Lee KE, Young P (1988) Sexual cannibalism in the praying mantis Hierodula membranacea. Behaviour 106:112–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bonduriansky R (2001) The evolution of male mate choice in insects: a synthesis of ideas and evidence. Biol Rev 76:305–339CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Brown WD, Muntz GA, Ladowski AJ (2012) Low mate encounter rate increases male risk taking in a sexually cannibalistic praying mantis. PLoS One 7:e35377CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. Edward DA, Chapman T (2011) The evolution and significance of male mate choice. Trend Ecol Evol 26:647–654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Elgar MA (1992) Sexual Cannibalism in Spiders and Other Invertebrates. In: Elgar MA, Crespi BJ (eds) Cannibalism: ecology and evolution among diverse taxa. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 128–155Google Scholar
  19. Elgar MA, Schneider JM (2004) Evolutionary significance of sexual cannibalism. Adv Stud Behav 34:135–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Elgar MA, Schneider JM, Herberstein ME (2000) Female control of paternity in the sexually cannibalistic spider Argiope keyserlingi. Proc R Soc Lond B 267:2439–2443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fromhage L, Schneider JM (2005) Safer sex with feeding females: sexual conflict in a cannibalistic spider. Behav Ecol 16:377–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gemeno C, Claramunt J (2006) Sexual approach in the praying mantid Mantis religiosa (L.). J Ins Behav 19:731–740CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Holwell GI, Winnick C, Tregenza T, Herberstein ME (2010) Genital shape correlates with sperm transfer success in the praying mantis Ciulfina klassi (Insecta: Mantodea). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 64:617–625CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Inoue T, Matsura T (1983) Foraging strategy of a mantid, Paratenodera angustipennis S.: mechanisms of switching tactics between ambush and active search. Oecologia 56:264–271CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Jayaweera A, Barry KL (2015) The effect of female quality on male ejaculatory expenditure and reproductive success in a praying mantid. PLoS ONE 10:e0124209CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. Johns PM, Maxwell MR (1997) Sexual cannibalism: who benefits? Trend Ecol Evol 12:127–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lelito JP, Brown WD (2006) Complicity or conflict over sexual cannibalism? Male risk taking in the praying mantis Tenodera aridifolia sinensis. Am Nat 168:263–269CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Lelito JP, Brown WD (2008) Mate attraction by females in a sexually cannibalistic praying mantis. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 63:313–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Liske E, Davis WJ (1987) Courtship and mating behaviour of the Chinese praying mantis, Tenodera aridifolia sinensis. Anim Behav 35:1524–1537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Matsura T, Inoue T (1999) The ecology and foraging strategy of Tenodera angustipennis. In: Prete FR, Wells H, Wells PH, Hurd LE (eds) The praying mantids. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, pp 61–68Google Scholar
  31. Maxwell MR (1999) Mating behavior. In: Prete FR, Wells H, Wells PH, Hurd LE (eds) The praying mantids. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, pp 69–89Google Scholar
  32. Maxwell MR (2000) Does a single meal affect female reproductive output in the sexually cannibalistic praying mantid Iris oratoria? Ecol Entomol 25:54–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Maxwell MR, Barry KL, Phillips PM (2010a) Examination of female pheromone use in two praying mantids: Stagmomantis limbata and Tenodera aridifolia sinensis (Mantodea: Mantidae). Ann Entomol Soc Am 100:108–114Google Scholar
  34. Maxwell MR, Gallego KM, Barry KL (2010b) Effects of female feeding regime in a sexually cannibalistic mantid: fecundity, cannibalism, and male response in Stagmomantis limbata (Mantodea). Ecol Entomol 35:775–787CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Moya-Laraño J, Pascual J, Wise DH (2004) Approach strategy by which male Mediterranean tarantulas adjust to the cannibalistic behaviour of females. Ethology 110:717–724CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Prokop P, Václav R (2008) Seasonal aspects of sexual cannibalism in the praying mantis (Mantis religiosa). J Ethol 26:213–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. SAS Institute (2009) JMP version 8. SAS Institute Inc., CaryGoogle Scholar
  38. Scardamaglia RC, Fosacheca S, Pompilio L (2015) Sexual conflict in a sexually cannibalistic praying mantid: males prefer low-risk over high-risk females. Anim Behav 99:9–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Schneider JM (2014) Sexual cannibalism as a manifestation of sexual conflict. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol 6:a017731CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  40. Welke KW, Schneider JM (2012) Sexual cannibalism benefits offspring survival. Anim Behav 83:201–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Japan Ethological Society and Springer Japan 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Human DevelopmentKobe UniversityNadaJapan
  2. 2.Graduate School of Human Development and EnvironmentKobe UniversityNadaJapan

Personalised recommendations