Skip to main content
Log in

Role-reversal in katydids: Habitat influences reproductive behaviour (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae, Metaballus sp.)

  • Published:
Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

Mating behaviour of the katydid Metaballus sp. varies. At sites QS and DB (in 1982) females competed for access to calling males and males chose mates by mating with heavier, more fecund females. At another site (BR) there was no evidence of role-reversal in reproductive behaviour, and males were observed to compete for mates. This species has a large spermatophore, a product of male reproductive glands, that is eaten by the female after mating. Males at the DB site had small reproductive glands. This suggests that some aspect of the QS and DB environments decreases spermatophore production; spermatophores become a limiting resource for females resulting in the reversal in reproductive roles observed at these sites. A field experiment that involved moving individuals from site BR to QS in 1983 determined that mating system was influerced by site (Table 1). At BR, males produced a continuous calling song, a third of the males observed attracted mates, and called for about 30 min before the female arrived; courtship duration was short. Males that were moved from BR to QS encountered a higher density of receptive females as all males attracted females after an average of just 3 min of calling. They changed their behaviour by producing short periodic bursts of song (“zipping”), and by courting females for long periods of time. The long courtship period may function as as a mate-assessment period for males. The reproductive behaviour of BR males moved to QS differed from that of native QS males only in the length of time spent in copula.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Altmann J (1974) Observational study of behavior: sampling methods. Behaviour 49:227–267

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey WJ, Thiele D (1983) Male spacing behaviour in the Tettigoniidae: an experimental approach. In: Gwynne D, Morris G (eds) Orthopteran mating systems: sexual competition in a diverse group of insects. Westview, Boulder, pp 163–184

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowen BJ, Codd CG, Gwynne DT (1984) The katydid spermatiphore (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae): male nutrient investment and its fate in the mated female. aust J Zool 32:23–31

    Google Scholar 

  • Broughton WB (1963) Method in bioacoustic terminology. In: Busnel R-G (ed) Acoustic behaviour of animals. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 3–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Burk T (1982) Evolutionary significance of predation on sexually signalling males. Fla Entomol 65:90–104

    Google Scholar 

  • Cade WH (1975) Acoustically orienting parasitoids: fly phonotaxis to cricket song. Science 190:1312–1313

    Google Scholar 

  • Emlen ST, Oring LW (1977) Ecology, sexual selection and the evolution of mating systems. Science 197:215–223

    Google Scholar 

  • Feaver M (1983) Pair formation in the katydid Orchelimum nigripes (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae). In: Gwynne D, Morris G (eds) Orthopteran mating systems: sexual competition in a diverse group of insects. Westview, Boulder, pp 205–239

    Google Scholar 

  • Gwynne DT (1981) Sexual difference theory: Mormon crickets show role reversal in mate choice. Science 213:779–780

    Google Scholar 

  • Gwynne DT (1982) Mate selection by female katydids (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae, Conocephalus nigropleurun). Anim Behav 30:734–738

    Google Scholar 

  • Gwynne DT (1983) Male nutritional investiment and the evolution of sexual differences in the Tettigoniidae and other Orthoptera. In: Gwynne D, Morris G (eds) Orthopteran mating systems: sexual competition in a diverse group of insects. Westview, Boulder, pp 337–366

    Google Scholar 

  • Gwynne DT (1984a) Sexual selection and sexual differences in Mormon crickets (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae, Anabrus simplex). Evolution 38:1011–1022

    Google Scholar 

  • Gwynne DT (1984b) Courtship feeding increases female reproductve success in bushcrickets. Nature 307:361–363

    Google Scholar 

  • Gwynne DT, Bowen BJ, Codd CG (1984) The function of the katydid spermatophore and its role in fecundity and insemination (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae). Aust J Zool 32:15–22

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris GK (1971) Aggression in male conocephaline grasshoppers (Tettigoniidae). Anim Behav 19:132–137

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris GK (1980) Calling display and mating behaviour of Copphora rhinoceros Pictet (Orthoptera: Tettigonidae). Anim Behav 28:42–51

    Google Scholar 

  • Rentz DC (1973) The shield-backed katydids of the genus Idiostatus. Mem Am Entomol Soc 29:1–211

    Google Scholar 

  • Rentz DCF (in press) A monograph of the Tettigoniidae of Australia. Part I. The Tettigoniinae. Monogr Aust J Zool

  • Sakaluk S (1984) Male crickets feed females to ensure complete sperm transfer. Science 223:609–610

    Google Scholar 

  • Thornhill R (in press) Relative parental investment of the sexes to offspring and the operation of sexual selection. In: Nitecki M, Kitchell J (eds) Evolution of behavior. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, III

  • Trivers RL (1972) Parental investment and sexual selection. In: Campbell B (ed) Sexual selection and the descent of man, 1871–1971. Aldine, Chicago, 136–179

    Google Scholar 

  • Wade M (1979) Sexual selection and variance in reproductive success. Am Nat 114:742–746

    Google Scholar 

  • Winer BJ (1971) Statistical principles in experimental design, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill, Kogakushi Tokyo

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gwynne, D.T. Role-reversal in katydids: Habitat influences reproductive behaviour (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae, Metaballus sp.). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 16, 355–361 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00295549

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00295549

Keywords

Navigation