Advertisement

Journal of Insect Behavior

, Volume 25, Issue 4, pp 401–407 | Cite as

Reproductive Consequences of Male Arrival Order in the Bark Beetle, Ips grandicollis

  • Matthew R. E. Symonds
  • Michael J. L. Magrath
  • Tanya M. Latty
Article

Abstract

For group-living animals the choice of whether to join aggregations or initiate their own is influenced by potential benefits such as group protection and reduced energetic expenditure, as well as costs such as competition for food and mates. The bark beetle Ips grandicollis is an invasive pest species that colonises recently felled timber in Australian pine (Pinus spp.) plantations. Male beetles initiate colonies by burrowing under the bark of trees and emitting an aggregation pheromone which attracts conspecifics, including a harem of females with whom they mate. We predicted that males that initiated colonies, or who arrived early, would have larger harems than later arrivals (due to decreased competition for females). However, we found the opposite effect with early-arriving males actually associated with fewer females than later arriving males, although this may have resulted from some females leaving harems as they get older. We conclude that pioneering does not improve male likelihood of attracting females in Ips grandicollis, at least initially, but it may provide advantages for offspring when competing for food during development.

Keywords

Aggregation harem size timing of arrival reproductive costs pioneer Scolytinae 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Forestry SA allowed us access to the Wirrabara plantations. We thank Charlma Phillips (Forestry SA) for making the arrangements for us to carry out the fieldwork, and the forester Bruno Turrini for logistical assistance and his generous help and enthusiasm. Emile van Lieshout and Kath McNamara provided comments on an earlier draft of this manuscript. This research was funded by a Discovery Project Grant from the Australian Research Council, a Canadian Natural Sciences and Research Council Graduate Scholarship, and travel grants from the Department of Zoology, University of Melbourne and the Western Forest Genetics Association (Canada and USA).

References

  1. Anderbrant O (1989) Reemergence and second brood in the bark beetle Ips typographus. Holarct Ecol 12:494–500Google Scholar
  2. Bensch S, Hasselquist D (1991) Territory infidelity in the polygynous great reed warbler Acrocephalus arudinaceus: the effect of variation in territory attractiveness. J Anim Ecol 60:857–871CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Byers JA (1989) Behavioral mechanisms involved in reducing competition in bark beetles. Holarct Ecol 12:466–476Google Scholar
  4. Candolin U, Voigt HR (2003) Size-dependent selection on arrival times in sticklebacks: why small males arrive first. Evolution 57:862–871PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Giraldeau LA, Beauchamp G (1999) Food exploitation: searching for the optimal joining policy. Trends Ecol Evol 14:102–106PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Heinsohn R, Packer C (1995) Complex cooperative strategies in group-territorial African lions. Science 269:1260–1262PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Kirkendall LR (1983) The evolution of mating systems in bark and ambrosia beetles (Coleoptera: Scolytidae and Platypodidae). Zool J Linn Soc 77:293–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Lanier GN, Cameron EA (1969) Secondary sexual characteristics in the North American species of the genus Ips (Coleoptera: Scolytidae). Can Entomol 101:862–870CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Latty TM, Reid ML (2009) First in line or first in time? Effects of settlement order and arrival date on reproduction of a group-living beetle, Dendroctonus ponderosae. J Anim Ecol 78:549–555PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Latty TM, Magrath MJL, Symonds MRE (2009) Harem size and oviposition behaviour in a polygynous bark beetle. Ecol Entomol 34:562–568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lawson SA, Furuta K, Katagiri K (1995) Effect of tree host and beetle density on reproduction and survival of Ips typographus japonicus Niijima (Col., Scolytidae), in Hokkaido, Japan. J Appl Entomol 119:383–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lindenfors P, Tullberg BS, Biuw M (2002) Phylogenetic analyses of sexual selection and sexual size dimorphism in pinnipeds. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 52:188–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Mangel M (1990) Resource divisibility, predation and group formation. Anim Behav 39:1163–1172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Morgan FD (1967) Ips grandicollis in South Australia. Austral For 31:137–155Google Scholar
  15. Pekar S, Hruskova M, Lubin Y (2005) Can solitary spiders (Araneae) cooperate in prey capture? J Anim Ecol 74:63–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Pureswaran DS, Sullivan BT, Ayres MP (2006) Fitness consequences of pheromone production and host selection strategies in a tree-killing bark beetle (Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Scolytinae). Oecologia 148:720–728PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Raffa KF (2001) Mixed messages across multiple trophic levels: the ecology of bark beetle chemical communication systems. Chemoecology 11:49–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Raffa KF, Berryman AA (1983) The role of host plant resistance in the colonization behavior and ecology of bark beetles (Coleoptera: Scolytidae). Ecol Monogr 53:27–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Rasbash J, Steele F, Browne W, Prosser B (2004) A user’s guide to MLwiN version 2.0. Institute of Education, LondonGoogle Scholar
  20. Reid ML (1999) Monogamy in the bark beetle Ips latidens: ecological correlates of an unusual mating system. Ecol Entomol 24:89–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Robertson IC (1998) Paternal care enhances male reproductive success in pine engraver beetles. Anim Behav 56:595–602PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Robins GL, Reid ML (1997) Effects of density on the reproductive success of pine engravers—is aggregation in dead trees beneficial? Ecol Entomol 22:329–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sallé A, Raffa KF (2007) Interactions among intraspecific competition, emergence patterns, and host selection behaviour in Ips pini (Coleoptera: Scolytinae). Ecol Entomol 32:162–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Schlyter F, Zhang QH (1996) Testing avian polygyny hypotheses in insects: harem size distribution and female egg gallery spacing in three Ips bark beetles. Oikos 76:57–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Smith RJ, Moore FR (2005) Arrival timing and seasonal reproductive performance in a long-distance migratory landbird. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 57:231–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Steed BF, Wagner MR (2004) Importance of log size on host selection and reproductive success from Ips pini (Coleoptera: Scolytidae) in ponderosa pine slash of northern Arizona and western Montana. J Econ Entomol 97:436–450PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Webster MS (1992) Sexual dimorphism, mating system and body size in new world blackbirds (Icterinae). Evolution 46:1621–1641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wood SL (1982) The bark and ambrosia beetles of North and Central America (Coleoptera: Scolytidae), a taxonomic monograph. Great Basin Nat Mem 6:1–1359Google Scholar
  29. Zhang QH, Byers JA, Schlyter F (1992) Optimal attack density in the larch bark beetle, Ips cembrae (Coleoptera: Scolytidae). J Appl Ecol 29:672–678CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matthew R. E. Symonds
    • 1
    • 2
  • Michael J. L. Magrath
    • 3
  • Tanya M. Latty
    • 4
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of ZoologyUniversity of MelbourneParkvilleAustralia
  2. 2.Centre for Integrative Ecology, School of Life and Environmental SciencesDeakin UniversityMelbourneAustralia
  3. 3.Department of Wildlife Conservation and ScienceZoos VictoriaParkvilleAustralia
  4. 4.Department of Biological SciencesUniversity of CalgaryCalgaryCanada
  5. 5.School of Biological SciencesUniversity of SydneySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations