Advertisement

Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 57, Issue 1, pp 62–68 | Cite as

Female rock shrimp Rhynchocinetes typus mate in rapid succession up a male dominance hierarchy

  • Martin ThielEmail author
  • Cristián Correa
Original Article

Abstract

The dynamics of male-male competition for mates and patterns of female choice depend critically on the social environment. We released newly molted sexually receptive females of the rock shrimp Rhynchocinetes typus in the field and recorded their interactions with males. In the dense aggregations in which these shrimp live, most females were encountered and seized by males within 2 min. Usually, females were first seized by subordinate males, and subsequently taken over by the dominant males. Many females (17 out of 23) had multiple mates during the 10-min observation period, and most of them received spermatophores from multiple males. Males used different mating tactics in accordance with their dominance status: subordinate males often used the sneaking tactic, seizing the female and immediately transferring spermatophores. In contrast, all dominant males used the primary mating tactic; they seized and stimulated the female before transferring spermatophores. Results from previous studies had indicated that females may reduce the fertilization chances of subordinate males by delaying spawning and removing spermatophores. We suggest that this capability in combination with the observed rapid mate succession may enable females to exploit male contest behaviors.

Keywords

Shrimp Polyandry Contest induction Female choice Sexual selection Mating systems 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to W. Stotz and I. Hinojosa for their support during various stages of this study. Inspiring discussions with T. van Son contributed to our understanding of rock-shrimp mating. Constructive criticism from A. Baeza and T. van Son is greatly appreciated. We are particularly grateful to J. Christy and three anonymous reviewers for extensive comments that helped to substantially improve the manuscript.

References

  1. Alatalo RV, Kotiaho J, Mappes J, Parri S (1998) Mate choice for offspring performance: major benefits or minor costs. Proc R Soc Lond B 265:2297—2301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alexander RD, Marshall DC, Cooley JR (1997) Evolutionary perspectives on insect mating. In: Choe JC, Crespi BJ (eds) The evolution of mating systems in insects and arachnids. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 4–31Google Scholar
  3. Andersson M (1994) Sexual selection. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJGoogle Scholar
  4. Arnqvist G, Nilsson T (2000) The evolution of polyandry: multiple mating and female fitness in insects. Anim Behav 60:145—164CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Backwell PRY, Passmore NI (1996) Time constraints and multiple choice criteria in the sampling behaviour and mate choice of the fiddler crab, Uca annulipes. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 38:407—416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bateman PW, Gilson LN, Ferguson JWH (2001) Male size and sequential mate preference in the cricket Gryllus bimaculatus. Anim Behav 61:631—637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bauer RT (1976) Mating behaviour and spermatophore transfer in the shrimp Heptacarpus pictus (Stimpson) (Decapoda: Caridea: Hippolytidae). J Nat Hist 10:415—440Google Scholar
  8. Bauer RT (2004) Remarkable shrimps—adaptations and natural history of the carideans. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, OklaGoogle Scholar
  9. Bauer RT, Abdalla JH (2001) Male mating tactics in the shrimp Palaemonetes pugio (Decapoda, Caridea): precopulatory mate guarding vs. pure searching. Ethology 107:185—199Google Scholar
  10. Berglund A, Bisazza A, Pilastro A (1996) Armaments and ornaments: an evolutionary explanation of traits of dual utility. Biol J Linn Soc 58:385—399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Birkhead TR, Møller AP (1998) Sperm competition and sexual selection. Academic Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  12. Blanckenhorn WU, Mühlhäuser C, Morf C, Reusch T, Reuter M (2000) Female choice, female reluctance to mate and sexual selection on body size in the dung fly Sepsis cynipsea. Ethology 106:577—593Google Scholar
  13. Caillaux LM, Stotz WB (2003) Distribution and abundance of Rhynchocinetes typus Milne Edwards (Crustacea Decapoda), in different benthic community structures in northern Chile. J Mar Biol Assoc UK 83:143—150Google Scholar
  14. Christy JH (1987) Competitive mating, mate choice and mating associations of brachyuran crabs. Bull Mar Sci 41:177—191Google Scholar
  15. Cordero A, Andrés JA (2002) Male coercion and convenience polyandry in a calopterygid damselfly. J Insect Sci 2:14Google Scholar
  16. Correa C, Thiel M (2003a) Mating systems in caridean shrimp (Decapoda: Caridea) and their evolutionary consequences for sexual dimorphism and reproductive biology. Rev Chil Hist Nat 76:187—203Google Scholar
  17. Correa C, Thiel M (2003b) Population structure and operational sex ratio in the rock shrimp Rhynchocinetes typus (Decapoda: Caridea). J Crust Biol 23:849—861Google Scholar
  18. Correa C, Baeza JA, Dupré E, Hinojosa IA, Thiel M (2000) Mating behavior and fertilization success of three ontogenetic stages of male rock shrimp Rhynchocinetes typus (Decapoda: Caridea). J Crust Biol 20:628—640Google Scholar
  19. Correa C, Baeza JA, Hinojosa IA, Thiel M (2003) Dominance hierarchy and mating tactics in the rock shrimp Rhynchocinetes typus (Decapoda: Caridea). J Crust Biol 23:33—45Google Scholar
  20. Cox CR, LeBoeuf BJ (1977) Female incitation of male competition: a mechanism in sexual selection. Am Nat 111:317—335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cunningham EJA, Birkhead TR (1998) Sex roles and sexual selection. Anim Behav 56:1311—1321CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. deRivera CE, Backwell PRY, Christy JH, Vehrencamp SL (2003) Density affects female and male mate searching in the fiddler crab, Uca beebei. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 53:72—83Google Scholar
  23. Díaz ER, Thiel M (2003) Female rock shrimp prefer dominant males. J Mar Biol Assoc UK 83:941—942CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Díaz ER, Thiel M (2004) Chemical and visual communication during mate searching in rock shrimp. Bio Bull 206:134–143Google Scholar
  25. Dick JTA, Elwood RW (1989) Assessments and decisions during mate choice in Gammarus pulex (Amphipoda). Behaviour 109:235—246Google Scholar
  26. Donaldson WE, Adams AE (1989) Ethogram of behavior with emphasis on mating for the Tanner crab Chionoecetes bairdi Rathbun. J Crust Biol 9:37—53Google Scholar
  27. Eberhard WG (1996) Female control: sexual selection by cryptic female choice. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJGoogle Scholar
  28. Forsgren E, Amundsen T, Borg AA, Bjelvenmark J (2004) Unusually dynamic sex roles in a fish. Nature 429:551—554CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Fox CW, Rauter CM (2003) Bet-hedging and the evolution of multiple mating. Evol Ecol Res 5:273—286Google Scholar
  30. Gabor CR, Halliday TR (1997) Sequential mate choice by multiply mating smooth newts: females become more choosy. Behav Ecol 8:162—166Google Scholar
  31. Harari AR, Handler AM, Landolt PJ (1999) Size-assortative mating, male choice and female choice in the curculionid beetle Diaprepes abbreviatus. Anim Behav 58:1191—1200CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Hinojosa I, Thiel M (2003) Somatic and gametic resources in male rock shrimp, Rhynchocinetes typus—effect of mating potential and ontogenetic male stage. Anim Behav 66:449—458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Iribarne O, Fernandez M, Armstrong D (1996) Mate choice in the amphipod Eogammarus oclairi Bousfield: the role of current velocity, random assortment, habitat heterogeneity and male’s behavior. Mar Freshwater Behav Physiol 27:223—237Google Scholar
  34. Jennions MD, Petrie M (1997) Variation in mate choice and mating preferences: a review of causes and consequences. Biol Rev 72:283—327CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Jennions MD, Petrie M (2000) Why do females mate multiply? A review of the genetic benefits. Biol Rev 75:21—64Google Scholar
  36. Jivoff P (1997) Sexual competition among male blue crab, Callinectes sapidus. Biol Bull 193:368—380Google Scholar
  37. Jormalainen V (1998) Precopulatory mate guarding in crustaceans—male competitive strategy and intersexual conflict. Q Rev Biol 73:275—304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Pitcher TE, Neff BD, Rodd FH, Rowe L (2003) Multiple mating and sequential mate choice in guppies: females trade up. Proc R Soc Lond B 270:1623—1629CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Ra’anan Z, Sagi A (1985) Alternative mating strategies in male morphotypes of the freshwater prawn Macrobrachium rosenbergii (De Man). Biol Bull 169:592—601Google Scholar
  40. Reynolds JD (1996) Animal breeding systems. Trends Ecol Evol 11:68—72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Reynolds JD, Gross MR (1990) Costs and benefits of female mate choice: is there a lek paradox? Am Nat 136:230—243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Rondeau A, Sainte-Marie B (2001) Variable mate-guarding time and sperm allocation by male snow crabs (Chionoecetes opilio) in response to sexual competition, and their impact on the mating success of females. Biol Bull 201:204—217PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Sainte-Marie B, Sévigny JM, Gauthier Y (1997) Laboratory behavior of adolescent and adult males of the snow crab (Chionoecetes opilio) (Brachyura: Majidae) mated noncompetitively and competitively with primiparous females. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 54:239—248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Semple S (1998) The function of Barbary macaque copulation calls. Proc R Soc Lond B 265:287—291CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Shuker DM, Day TH (2001) The repeatability of a sexual conflict over mating. Anim Behav 61:755—762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Simmons LW (2001) Sperm competition and its evolutionary consequences in the insects. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJGoogle Scholar
  47. Thiel M, Hinojosa I (2003) Mating behavior of female rock shrimp Rhynchocinetes typus (Decapoda: Caridea)—indication for convenience polyandry and cryptic female choice. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 55:113—121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Van Gossum H, Stoks R, De Bruyn L (2001) Frequency-dependent male mate harassment and intra-specific variation in its avoidance by females of the damselfly Ischnura elegans. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 51:69—75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Watson PJ (1990) Female-enhanced male competition determines the first mate and principal sire in the spider Linyphia litigiosa (Linyphiidae). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 26:77–90Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Facultad Ciencias del MarUniversidad Católica del NorteCoquimboChile
  2. 2.Centro de Estudios Avanzados en Zonas Áridas (CEAZA)CoquimboChile

Personalised recommendations