Journal of Insect Behavior

, Volume 19, Issue 6, pp 731–740 | Cite as

Sexual Approach in the Praying Mantid Mantis Religiosa (L.)

  • César Gemeno
  • Jordi ClaramuntEmail author

Males of sexually cannibalistic species are thought to express behaviors that reduce the risk of being killed by the females. In several spider species the male modulates his approach to the female as a function of her feeding behavior. We tested this hypothesis in the preying mantid Mantis religiosa (L.). Males were placed behind perching females in a laboratory arena and their position was video-recorded. Females were presented with a prey item (prey-presentation period) and then either they were allowed to capture and eat the prey (“P” treatment), or the prey was removed before the female could capture it (“NP” treatment). For the next 10 min (between-prey-presentation period) the females ate the prey (P), or perched without moving (NP). Total speed of approach of males was over 6-times higher in the P treatment (2.3 cm/min) than in the NP treatment (0.4 cm/min). Speed in the prey-presentation period was higher in P than in NP (4.4 cm/min and 1.3 cm/min, respectively), which shows that seeing a female striking and/or grasping the prey in itself stimulated faster male approach. Approach speed in the between-prey presentation period was also higher in P than in NP (1.9 cm/min and 0.2 cm/min, respectively), which indicates that seeing a female feeding on the prey and/or cleaning her forelegs also stimulates male approach. We conclude that males of M. religiosa can assess the activity state of the females and respond to this information by modulating their speed of approach, probably reducing the risk of being detected and possibly cannibalized.


Mantis religiosa sexual cannibalism mating behavior 



We thank F. Fabritius, N. Fabritius and J. Dasca for collecting mantids, R. Vaquera for technical help, D. Casado for his helpful observations during the early stages of the study, and M. Maxwell and J. Moya-Laraño for discussion of an early version of the manuscript. This research is funded in part by a Ramón y Cajal grant from the MCYT of Spain to C.G.


  1. Barrows, E. M. (1984). Perch sites and food of adult Chinese mantis (Dictyoptera: Mantidae). Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 86: 898–901.Google Scholar
  2. Elgar, M. A. (1992). Sexual cannibalism in spiders and other invertebrates. In Elgar, M. A. and Crespi, B. J. (eds.), Cannibalism: Ecology and Evolution among Diverse Taxa, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 129–155.Google Scholar
  3. Fromhage, L., and Schneider, J. (2005). Safer sex with feeding females: Sexual conflict in a cannibalistic spider. Behav. Ecol. 16: 377–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Gemeno, C., Claramunt, J., and Dasca, J. (2005). Nocturnal calling behavior in mantids. J. Insect Behav. 18: 389–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hurd, L. E. (1999). Ecology of preying mantids. In Prete, F. E., Wells, H., Wells, P., and Hurd, L. E. (eds.), The Praying Mantids, Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, pp. 43–60.Google Scholar
  6. Hurd, L. E., Prete, F. R., Jones, T. H., Singh, T. B., Jason, C. O., and Portman, R. T. (2004). First identification of a putative sex pheromone in a praying mantid. J. Chem. Ecol. 30: 155–166.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Inoue, T., and Matsura, T. (1983). Foraging strategy of a mantid, Paratenodera agustioennis S.: Mechanism of switching tactics between ambush and active search. Oecologia 56: 264–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kynaston, S. E., McErlain-Ward, P., and Mill, P. J. (1994). Courtship, mating behaviour and sexual cannibalism in the praying mantis. Sphrodomantis lineola. Anim. Behav. 47: 739–741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Lawrence, S. E. (1992). Sexual cannibalism in the preying mantid, Mantis religiosa: a field study. Anim. Behav. 43: 569–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Liske, E., and Davis, W. J. (1984). Sexual behaviour of the Chinese praying mantis. Anim. Behav. 32: 916–917.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Liske, E., and Mohren, W. (1984). Saccadic head movements of the praying mantis, with particular reference to visual and propioreceptive information. Physiol. Entomol. 9: 29–38.Google Scholar
  12. Liske, E., and Davis, W. J. (1986). Behavioural suppression of head grooming in the male preying mantis during mating. Naturwissenschaften 73: 333–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Liske, E., and Davis, W. J. (1987). Courtship and mating behaviour of the Chinese praying mantis. Tenodera aridifolia sinensis. Anim. Behav. 35: 1524–1537.Google Scholar
  14. Maxwell, M. R. (1998). Lifetime mating opportunities and male mating behaviour in sexually cannibalistic praying mantids. Anim. Behav. 55: 1011–1028.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Maxwell, M. R. (1999a). Mating behavior. In Prete, F. E., Wells, H., Wells, P., and Hurd, L. E. (eds.), The Praying Mantids, Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, pp. 69–89.Google Scholar
  16. Maxwell, M. R. (1999b). The risk of cannibalism and male mating behaviour in the mediterranean praying mantid. Iris oratoria. Behaviour 136: 205–219.Google Scholar
  17. Moya-Laraño, J., Pascual, J., and Wise, D. H. (2004). Approach strategy by which male Mediterranean tarantulas adjust to the cannibalistic behaviour of females. Ethology 110: 717–724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Perez, B. (2005). Calling behaviour in the female praying mantis. Hierodula patellifera. Physiol. Entomol. 30: 42–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Prenter, J., Elwood, R. W., and Montgomery, I. (1994). Male exploitation of female predatory behaviour reduces sexual cannibalism in male autumn spiders. Metellina segmentata. Anim. Behav. 47: 235–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Prete, F. R. and Hamilton, K. (1999). Prey capture. In Prete, F. E., Wells, H., Wells, P., and Hurd, L. E. (eds.), The Praying Mantids, Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, pp. 194–223.Google Scholar
  21. Prokop, P., and Václav, R. (2005). Males respond to risk of sperm competition in the sexually cannibalistic praying mantis. Mantis religiosa. Ethology 111: 836–848.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Robinson, M. H., and Robinson, B. (1979). By dawn’s early light: Matutinal mating and sex attractants in a neotropical mantid. Science 205: 825–827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Roeder, K. D. (1935). An experimental analysis of the sexual behaviour of the preying mantis (Mantis religiosa L.). Biol. Bull. 69: 203–220.Google Scholar
  24. SAS Institute (2000). SAS Institute Inc., Cary, North Carolina.Google Scholar
  25. Sokal, R. R., and Rohlf, F. J. (1995). Biometry, Freeman, New York.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Departament de Producció Vegetal i Ciencia ForestalUniversitat de LleidaLleidaSpain

Personalised recommendations