, Volume 138, Issue 1, pp 19–25 | Cite as

Mating positions and the evolution of asymmetric insect genitalia

  • Bernhard A. Huber


Genital asymmetry is a recurring phenomenon in insect morphology and current data suggest that it has arisen multiple times independently in several neopteran orders. Various explanations have been proposed, including space constraints, ecological constraints, sexual selection via antagonistic coevolution, and sexual selection via changed mating positions. Each of these hypotheses may best explain individual cases, but only the last seems to account for the large majority of insect genital asymmetries. Here I summarize the basic assumptions and evolutionary steps implied in this model and review the evidence for each of them. Several components of this scenario can be easily tested, for example by including genital asymmetries and mating positions in phylogenetic analyses. Others require in-depth analyses of the function of asymmetric genital structures, targeted comparative analyses (e.g., of taxa with sex-role reversal, taxa with reversal to symmetry, etc.), and of female genital neuroanatomy.


Sexual selection Sexual conflict Asymmetry Insect Genitalia Mating position 



I thank D. Joly and M. Schmitt for their invitation to the symposium on animal genitalia at the ICZ2008 meeting in Paris, and numerous participants for stimulating discussions. Two anonymous referees provided helpful suggestions for improvement.


  1. Ahrens D (2005) A taxonomic review on the Serica (s.str.) MacLeay, 1819 species of Asian mainland (Coleoptera, Scarabaeidae, Sericini). Nova Suppl Entomol 18:1–163Google Scholar
  2. Alexander RD (1964) The evolution of mating behavior in arthropods. R entomol Soc London Symp 2:78–94Google Scholar
  3. Alexander RD, Otte D (1967) The evolution of genitalia and mating behavior in crickets (Gryllidae) and other Orthoptera. Misc Publ Mus Zool Univ Mich 133:1–62Google Scholar
  4. Asche M (1985) Zur Phylogenie der Delphacidae Leach, 1815 (Homoptera Cicadina Fulgoromorpha). Marburger entomol Publ 2(1):1–910Google Scholar
  5. Baunacke W (1912) Statische Sinnesorgane bei den Nepiden. Zool Jb Abt Anat Ontog Tiere 34:179–346 (pl. 10–13)Google Scholar
  6. Berthélemy C (1979) Accouplement, période d’incubation et premiers stades larvaires de Brachyptera braueri et de Perlodes microcephalus (Plecoptera). Ann Limnol 15:317–335Google Scholar
  7. Bickel DJ (1987) Babindellinae, a new subfamily of Dolichopodidae (Diptera) from Australia, with a description of symmetry in the dipteran male postabdomen. Entomol Scand 18:97–113Google Scholar
  8. Bornemissza GF (1966) Observations on the hunting and mating behaviour of two species of scorpion flies (Bittacidae: Mecoptera). Aust J Zool 14:371–382. doi: 10.1071/ZO9660371 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bradler S (1999) The vomer of Timema Scudder, 1895 (Insecta: Phasmatodea) and its significance for phasmatodean phylogeny. Courier Forschungsinstitut Senckenberg 215:43–47Google Scholar
  10. Briceño RD, Eberhard WG (1995) The functional morphology of male cerci and associated characters in 13 species of tropical earwigs (Dermaptera: Forficulidae, Labiidae, Carcinophoridae, Pygidicranidae). Smithson Contrib Zool 555:1–64Google Scholar
  11. Brinck P (1957) Reproductive system and mating in Ephemeroptera. Opusc Entomol 22:1–37Google Scholar
  12. Carayon J (1977) Insémination extra-genitale traumatique. Traite Zool 8:351–390Google Scholar
  13. Carpenter FM (1936) Descriptions and records of Nearctic Mecoptera. Psyche 43:56–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cobben RH (1982) The hebrid fauna of the Ethiopian Kaffa Province, with considerations on species grouping (Hebridae, Heteroptera). Tijdschr Entomol 125:1–24Google Scholar
  15. Cook PP (1963) Mating behaviour of Psylla pyricola Forster (Hom. Psyllidae). Pan-Pac Entomol 39:175Google Scholar
  16. Cooper KW (1974) Sexual biology, chromosomes, development, life histories and parasites of Boreus, especially of B. notoperates, a southern Californian Boreus, II. (Mecoptera: Boreidae). Psyche 81:84–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Crampton GC (1940) The mating habits of the winter mecopteron, Boreus brumalis Fitch. Psyche 47:125–128Google Scholar
  18. Davis NT, Usinger RL (1970) The biology and relationships of the Joppeicidae (Heteroptera). Ann Entomol Soc Am 63:577–586Google Scholar
  19. Despax R (1949) Ordre des éphéméroptères. Traite Zool 9:279–309Google Scholar
  20. Eberhard WG (1985) Sexual selection and animal genitalia. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  21. Eberhard WG (1991) Copulatory courtship and cryptic female choice in insects. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 66:1–31. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-185X.1991.tb01133.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Eberhard WG (1994) Evidence for widespread courtship during copulation in 131 species of insects and spiders, and implications for cryptic female choice. Evolution Int J Org Evolution 48:711–733. doi: 10.2307/2410481 Google Scholar
  23. Eberhard WG (1996) Female control: sexual selection by cryptic female choice. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJGoogle Scholar
  24. Ekblom T (1926) Morphological and biological studies of the Swedish families of Hemiptera–Heteroptera. Part I. The families Saldidae, Nabidae, Lygaeidae, Hydrometridae, Veliidae and Gerridae. Zool bidrag Uppsala 10:31–180Google Scholar
  25. Fedorov SM (1927) Studies in the copulation and oviposition of Anacridium aegyptium, L. (Orthoptera, Acrididae). Trans entomol Soc Lond 75:53–61Google Scholar
  26. Friederichs K (1934) Das Gemeinschaftsleben der Embiiden und Näheres zur Kenntnis der Arten. Arch Naturgesch NF 3:405–444Google Scholar
  27. Gielis C (1993) Generic revision of the superfamily Pterophoroidea (Lepidoptera). Zool Verh 290:1–139Google Scholar
  28. Haas F (1995) The phylogeny of the Forficulina, a suborder of the Dermaptera. Syst Entomol 20:85–98. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3113.1995.tb00085.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Haas F, Kukalova-Peck J (2001) Dermaptera hindwing structure and folding: new evidence for familial, ordinal and superordinal relationships within Neoptera (Insecta). Eur J Entomol 98:445–509Google Scholar
  30. Hase A (1932) Beobachtungen an venezolanischen Triatoma-Arten, sowie zur allgemeinen Kenntnis der Familie der Triatomidae (Hemipt.–Heteropt.). Zeitschr Parasitenk 4:585–652 (pl. 4)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hebsgaard MB, Andersen NM, Damgaard J (2004) Phylogeny of the true water bugs (Nepomorpha: Hemiptera–Heteroptera) based on 16S and 28S rDNA and morphology. Syst Entomol 29:488–508. doi: 10.1111/j.0307-6970.2004.00254.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Heming-van Battum KE, Heming BS (1989) Structure, function, and evolutionary significance of the reproductive system in males of Hebrus ruficeps and H. pusillus (Heteroptera, Gerromorpha, Hebridae). J Morphol 202:281–323. doi: 10.1002/jmor.1052020302 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hennig W (1973) Ordnung Diptera (Zweiflügler). Handb Zool 4(2) 2/31:1–337Google Scholar
  34. Herter K (1963) Zur Fortpflanzungsbiologie des Sand- oder Uferohrwurms Labidura riparia Pall. Zool Beitr NF 8:297–329Google Scholar
  35. Hincks WD, Popham EJ (1970) Dermaptera. In: Tuxen SL (ed) Taxonomists’s glossary of genitalia in insects. Munksgaard, Copenhagen, pp 75–80Google Scholar
  36. Hoch H (2006) Systematics and evolution of Iolania (Hemiptera: Fulgoromorpha: Cixiidae) from Hawai’i. Syst Entomol 31:302–320. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3113.2005.00312.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hodges RW (1998) The Gelechioidea. Handb Zool 4(35):131–158Google Scholar
  38. Holland GP (1955) Primary and secondary sexual characteristics of some Ceratophyllinae, with notes on the mechanism of copulation (Siphonaptera). Trans R entomol Soc Lond 107:233–248Google Scholar
  39. Hsu Y-F, Powell JA (2005) Phylogenetic relationships within Heliodinidae and systematics of moths formerly assigned to Heliodines Stainton (Lepidoptera: Yponomeutoidea). Univ California Publ 124:1–158 (Figs. 26–220)Google Scholar
  40. Huber BA, Sinclair B, Schmitt M (2007) The evolution of asymmetric genitalia in spiders and insects. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 82:647–698. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-185X.2007.00029.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Jordan KHC (1972) Heteroptera (Wanzen). Handb Zool, IV Arthropoda, 2 Insecta 20:1–113Google Scholar
  42. Jordan KHC, Wendt A (1938) Zur Biologie von Salda litoralis L. (Hem. Het.). Stettiner entomol Z 99:273–292Google Scholar
  43. Kaila L (2004) Phylogeny of the superfamily Gelechioidea (Lepidoptera: Ditrysia): an exemplar approach. Cladistics 20:303–340. doi: 10.1111/j.1096-0031.2004.00027.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kaltenbach A (1978) Mecoptera (Schnabelkerfe, Schnabelfliegen). Handb Zool, IV Arthropoda, 2 Insecta 28:1–111Google Scholar
  45. Kamimura Y (2006) Right-handed penises of the earwig Labidura riparia (Insecta, Dermaptera, Labiduridae): evolutionary relationships between structural and behavioral asymmetries. J Morphol 267:1381–1389. doi: 10.1002/jmor.10484 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Keilbach R (1935) Über asymmetrische Flügellage bei Insekten und ihre Beziehungen zu anderen Asymmetrien. Z Morphol Oekol Tiere 29:1–44. doi: 10.1007/BF00407463 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Khalifa A (1950) Spermatophore production in Blatella germanica L. (Orthoptera: Blattidae). Proc R entomol Soc Lond (A) 25:53–61Google Scholar
  48. Klier E (1956) Zur Konstruktionsmorphologie des männlichen Geschlechtsapparates der Psocopteren. Zool Jb Abt Anat Ontog Tiere 75:207–286Google Scholar
  49. Kluge NY (2003) Trudi Russkogo Entomologicheckogo Obshchestva. Ob evolyutsii i homologii genitalinich pridatkov nacekomich 74:3–16 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  50. Kuhl W (1928) Die Variabilität der abdominalen Körperanhänge von Forficula auricularia L. unter Berücksichtigung ihrer normalen und abnormen Entwicklung, nebst einem Anhang über die Geschlechtsbiologie. Z Morphol Oekol Tiere 12:299–532. doi: 10.1007/BF00403121 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Kullenberg B (1947) Über Morphologie und Funktion des Kopulationsapparates der Capsiden und Nabiden. Zool bidrag Uppsala 24:217–418Google Scholar
  52. Kunze L (1959) Die funktionsanatomischen Grundlagen der Kopulation der Zwergzikaden, untersucht an Euscelis plebejus (Fall.) und einigen Typholocybinen. D entomol Z (NF) 4:322–387Google Scholar
  53. Kuznetzov VI, Baryshnikova SV (2004) Evolutionary-morphological approach to the systematics of leafmining moths of the genus Phyllonorycter Hbn. (Lepidoptera, Gracillariidae) with account of species feeding specialization. Entomol Rev Wash 84:588–599Google Scholar
  54. Lamb CG (1922) The geometry of insect pairing. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 94:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Landry J-F (1991) Systematics of Nearctic Scythrididae (Lepidoptera: Gelechioidea): phylogeny and classification of supraspecific taxa, with a review of described species. Mem Entomol Soc Can 160:1–341Google Scholar
  56. Larsén O (1938) Untersuchungen über den Geschlechtsapparat der aquatilen Wanzen. Opusc Entomol Suppl 1:1–388Google Scholar
  57. Ludwig W (1932) Das Rechts-Links-Problem im Tierreich und beim Menschen. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  58. McAlpine JF (1981) Morphology and terminology—adults. In: McAlpine JF, Peterson BV, Shewell GE, Teskey HJ, Vockeroth JR, Wood DM (eds) Manual of Nearctic Diptera, vol 1, Agriculture Canada Monograph 27:9–63Google Scholar
  59. Mickoleit G, Mickoleit E (1976) Über die funktionelle Bedeutung der Tergalapophysen von Boreus westwoodi (Hagen) (Insecta, Mecoptera). Zoomorph 85:157–164. doi: 10.1007/BF00995409 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Mickoleit G, Mickoleit E (1978) Zum Kopulationsverhalten des Mückenhaftes Bittacus italicus (Mecopetra: Bittacidae). Entomol Gen 5:1–15Google Scholar
  61. Mika G (1959) Über das Paarungsverhalten der Wanderheuschrecke Locusta migratoria R. und F. und deren Abhängigkeit vom Zustand der inneren Geschlechtsorgane. Zool Beitr 4:153–203Google Scholar
  62. Mitzmain MB (1910) Some new facts on the bionomics of the California rodent fleas. Ann Entomol Soc Am 3:61–82Google Scholar
  63. Mockford EL (1957) Life history studies on some Florida insects on the genus Archipsocus (Psocoptera). Bull Fla State Mus Biol Sci 1:253–274Google Scholar
  64. Morgan AH (1929) The mating flight and the vestigial structures of the stump-legged mayfly, Campsurus segnis Needham. Ann entomol Soc America 22:61–68 (pl. 1)Google Scholar
  65. Morse JC, Yang L (2002) Phylogeny, classification, and historical biogeography of world species of Mystacides (Trichoptera: Leptoceridae), with a new species from Sri Lanka. Nova Suppl Entomol 15:173–186Google Scholar
  66. Nelson CH (1984) Numerical cladistic analysis of phylogenetic relationships in Plecoptera. Ann Entomol Soc Am 77:466–473Google Scholar
  67. Nuttall GHF (1917) Studies on Pediculus I. The copulatory apparatus and the process of copulation in Pediculus humanus. Parasitology 9:293–324 (pl. 3, 4)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Ogden TH, Whiting MF (2003) The problem with “the Paleoptera problem:” sense and sensitivity. Cladistics 19:432–442Google Scholar
  69. Popham EJ (1965) The functional morphology of the reproductive organs of the common earwig (Forficula auricularia) and other Dermaptera with reference to the natural classification of the order. J Zool 146:1–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Rawat BL (1939) On the habits, metamorphosis and reproductive organs of Naucoris cimicoides L. (Hemiptera–Heteroptera). Trans R entomol Soc Lond 88:119–138Google Scholar
  71. Richards OW (1927) Sexual selection and allied problems in the insects. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 11:298–364. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-185X.1927.tb01401.x Google Scholar
  72. Ross ES (1970) Biosystematics of the Embioptera. Annu Rev Entomol 15:157–172. doi: 10.1146/annurev.en.15.010170.001105 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Ross ES (2000) A review of the biology of Embiidina. Occas Pap Calif Acad Sci 149(2):1–36Google Scholar
  74. Rothschild M, Hinton HE (1968) Holding organs on the antennae of male fleas. Proc R entomol Soc Lond (A) 43:105–107Google Scholar
  75. Schmutz W (1955) Zur Konstruktionsmorphologie des männlichen Geschlechtsapparates der Mallophagen. Zool Jb Abt Anat Ontog Tiere 74:189–338Google Scholar
  76. Schrader F (1930) Observations on the biology of Protortonia primitiva (Coccidae). Ann Entomol Soc Am 23:126–132Google Scholar
  77. Schuh RT, Slater JA (1995) True bugs of the world (Hemiptera: Heteroptera). Classification and natural history. Cornell University Press, Ithaca and LondonGoogle Scholar
  78. Schulmeister S (2001) Functional morphology of the male genitalia and copulation in lower Hymenoptera, with special emphasis on the Tenthredinoidea s. str. (Insecta, Hymenoptera, ‘Symphyta’). Acta Zool 82:331–349. doi: 10.1046/j.1463-6395.2001.00094.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Scott JA (1978) Mid-valval flexion in the left valva of asymmetric genitalia of Erynnis (Hesperiidae). J Lepid Soc 32:304–305Google Scholar
  80. Scudder GGE (1971) Comparative morphology of insect genitalia. Annu Rev Entomol 16:379–406. doi: 10.1146/annurev.en.16.010171.002115 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Séguy E (1944) Insectes ectoparasites (Mallophages). Faune Fr 43:23–407Google Scholar
  82. Sforza R, Bourgoin T (1998) Female genitalia and copulation of the planthopper Hyalesthes obsoletus Signoret (Hemiptera: Fulgoromorpha: Cixiidae). Ann Soc entomol France (NS) 34:63–70Google Scholar
  83. Sihvonen P (2005) Phylogeny and classification of the Scopulini moths (Lepidoptera: Geometridae, Sterrhinae). Zool J Linn Soc 143:473–530. doi: 10.1111/j.1096-3642.2005.00153.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Sinclair BJ, Cumming JM (2006) The morphology, higher-level phylogeny and classification of the Empidoidea (Diptera). Zootaxa 1180:1–172Google Scholar
  85. Singh-Pruthi H (1925) The morphology of the male genitalia in Rhynchota. Trans entomol Soc London (1925):127–267Google Scholar
  86. Snodgrass RE (1936) Morphology of the insect abdomen. Part III. The male genitalia. Smiths Misc Coll 95:1–96Google Scholar
  87. Snodgrass RE (1937) The male genitalia of orthopteroid insects. Smiths Misc Coll 96:1–107Google Scholar
  88. Soulier-Perkins A, Bourgoin T (1998) Copulatory mechanisms and sexual selection in the Lophopidae (Hemiptera: Fulgoromorpha). Ann Soc entomol France (NS) 34:149–162Google Scholar
  89. Statzner B (1974) Funktionsmorphologische Studien am Genitalapparat von drei neuen Cheumatopsyche-Arten (Trichoptera, Hydropsychidae). Zool Anz 193:382–398Google Scholar
  90. Stefani R (1953) Un particolare modo di accoppiamento negli Insetti Embioterri. Rend Accad Naz Lincei (sci fis mat nat) ser 8(14):544–549Google Scholar
  91. Steiner P (1937) Beitrag zur Fortpflanzungsbiologie und Morphologie des Genitalapparates von Boreus hiemalis L. Z Morph Ökol Tiere 32:276–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Stewart KW, Stark BP (1977) Reproductive system and mating of Hydroperla crosbyi: a newly discovered method of sperm transfer in Insecta. Oikos 28:84–89. doi: 10.2307/3543326 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Takemon Y (1990) Functional morphology of the genitalia in Epeorus ikanonis (Ephemeroptera, Heptageniidae). Jap J Entomol 58:115–124Google Scholar
  94. Terry LI, Dyreson E (1996) Behavior of Frakliniella occidentalis (Thysanoptera: Thripidae) within aggregations, and morphometric correlates of fighting. Ann Entomol Soc Am 89:589–602Google Scholar
  95. Tilgner EH, Kiselyova TG, McHugh JV (1999) A morphological study of Timema cristinae Vickery with implications for the phylogenetics of Phasmida. Entomol Z 46:149–162Google Scholar
  96. Tobias W (1972) Zur Kenntnis europäischer Hydropsychidae (Insecta: Trichoptera), I. Senckenb Biol 53:59–89Google Scholar
  97. Vickery VR (1993) Revision of Timema Scudder (Phasmatoptera: Timematodea) including three new species. Can Entomol 125:657–692CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Walker EM (1922) The terminal structures of orthopteroid insects: a phylogenetic study. Ann Entomol Soc Am 15:1–87Google Scholar
  99. Walker KA, Fell RD (2001) Courtship roles of male and female European earwigs, Forficula auricularia L. (Dermaptera: Forficulidae), and sexual use of forceps. J Insect Behav 14:1–17. doi: 10.1023/A:1007843227591 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Weber H (1930) Die Biologie der Hemipteren. Biol Studienb Berl 11:1–537Google Scholar
  101. White TCR (1970) Some aspects of the life history, host selection, dispersal and oviposition of adult Cardiaspina densitexta (Homoptera: Psyllidae). Aust J Zool 18:105–117. doi: 10.1071/ZO9700105 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Whitman DW, Loher W (1984) Morphology of the male sex organs and insemination in the grasshopper Taeniopoda eques (Burmeister). J Morphol 179:1–12. doi: 10.1002/jmor.1051790102 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Yang L, Morse JC (2002) Glossosoma subgenus Lipoglossa (Trichoptera: Glossosomatidae) of China. Nova Suppl Entomol 15:253–276Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Alexander Koenig Research Museum of ZoologyBonnGermany

Personalised recommendations