A sensory ecological perspective on mate sampling strategies: simulation models and an empirical test

Long-range communication signals play a central role in mate search and mate choice across a wide range of taxa. Among the different aspects of mate choice, the strategy an individual employ to search for potential mates (mate sampling) has been less explored despite its significance. Although analytical models of mate sampling have demonstrated significant differences in individual fitness returns for different sampling strategies, these models have rarely incorporated relevant information on the ecology of signalers and sensory physiology of receivers, both of which can profoundly influence which sampling strategy is optimal. In this study, we used simulation models to compare the costs and benefits of different female mate sampling strategies in an acoustically communicating field cricket (Plebeiogryllus guttiventris) by incorporating information on relative spacing of callers in natural choruses, their signal intensity and the effect of signal intensity on female phonotaxis behaviour. Mating with the louder caller that the female first approaches emerged as the optimal strategy, thus reflecting the importance of physiological mechanisms of sound signal localization (passive attraction) over active sampling. When tested empirically in the field, female behaviour was consistent with passive attraction.

[1]  M. Milinski,et al.  Sequential female choice and the previous male effect in sticklebacks , 1991, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[2]  H. Gerhardt,et al.  Mate sampling by female barking treefrogs (Hyla gratiosa) , 2002 .

[3]  William E. Wagner,et al.  Experience Affects Female Responses to Male Song in the Variable Field Cricket Gryllus lineaticeps (Orthoptera, Gryllidae) , 2001 .

[4]  Natasha Mhatre,et al.  Phonotactic walking paths of field crickets in closed-loop conditions and their simulation using a stochastic model , 2007, Journal of Experimental Biology.

[5]  Barney Luttbeg,et al.  A Comparative Bayes tactic for mate assessment and choice , 1996 .

[6]  J. Byers,et al.  A Large Cost of Female Mate Sampling in Pronghorn , 2005, The American Naturalist.

[7]  Male behaviour over the season in a wild population of the field cricket Gryllus campestris L. , 2007 .

[8]  P. Wickman,et al.  An estimate of female mate searching costs in the lekking butterfly Coenonympha pamphilus , 1997, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[9]  D. Blumstein Acoustic Communication in Insects and Anurans : Common Problems and Diverse Solutions , 2002 .

[10]  J. Slate,et al.  Natural and Sexual Selection in a Wild Insect Population , 2010, Science.

[11]  R. Meldola Sexual Selection , 1871, Nature.

[12]  J. Kotiaho,et al.  Mate choice for indirect genetic benefits: scrutiny of the current paradigm , 2007 .

[13]  I. Cuthill,et al.  Effect size, confidence interval and statistical significance: a practical guide for biologists , 2007, Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

[14]  Only distance matters – non-choosy females in a poison frog population , 2013, Frontiers in Zoology.

[15]  Daniel D Wiegmann,et al.  Mate choice and uncertainty in the decision process. , 2007, Journal of theoretical biology.

[16]  R. Gibson,et al.  How do animals choose their mates? , 1996, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[17]  Eldridge S. Adams,et al.  Active mate choice at cock-of-the-rock leks: tactics of sampling and comparison , 1989, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[18]  R. Balakrishnan,et al.  Male spacing behaviour and acoustic interactions in a field cricket: implications for female mate choice , 2006, Animal Behaviour.

[19]  L. Real Search Theory and Mate Choice. I. Models of Single-Sex Discrimination , 1990, The American Naturalist.

[20]  Y. Lubin,et al.  High male mate search costs and a female-biased sex ratio shape the male mating strategy in a desert spider , 2011, Animal Behaviour.

[21]  Daniel D. Wiegmann,et al.  Search behaviour and mate choice by female field crickets, Gryllus integer , 1999, Animal Behaviour.

[22]  L. Real,et al.  Some Distinguishing Features of Models of Search Behavior and Mate Choice , 1996, The American Naturalist.

[23]  Spatio-Temporal Dynamics of Field Cricket Calling Behaviour: Implications for Female Mate Search and Mate Choice , 2016, PloS one.

[24]  Mate Sampling and Assessment Procedures in Female Pied Flycatchers (Ficedula hypoleuca) , 2010 .

[25]  G. Patricelli,et al.  Complex Mate Searching in the Satin Bowerbird Ptilonorhynchus violaceus , 2001, The American Naturalist.

[26]  J. Stamps,et al.  Female Mate Choice Tactics in A Resource‐Based Mating System: Field Tests of Alternative Models , 1997, The American Naturalist.

[27]  T. Tregenza,et al.  Guarding Males Protect Females from Predation in a Wild Insect , 2011, Current Biology.

[28]  M. Milinski,et al.  Costs influences sequential mate choice in sticklebacks, Gasterosteus aculeatus , 1992, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[29]  Anja C. Schunke,et al.  Quantitative shape analysis with weighted covariance estimates for increased statistical efficiency , 2013, Frontiers in Zoology.

[30]  R. Balakrishnan,et al.  Predicting acoustic orientation in complex real-world environments , 2008, Journal of Experimental Biology.

[31]  Call Intensity and Female Preferences in the European Green Toad , 2000 .

[32]  T. Amundsen,et al.  Mate sampling behaviour of female pied flycatchers: evidence for active mate choice , 1990, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[33]  M. Kasumovic,et al.  Risky mate search and mate preference in the golden orb-web spider (Nephila plumipes) , 2007 .

[34]  Y. Dombrovsky,et al.  On Adaptive Search and Optimal Stopping in Sequential Mate Choice , 1994, The American Naturalist.

[35]  S. Dale,et al.  Competition for a mate restricts mate search of female pied flycatchers , 1992, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[36]  I. Booksmythe,et al.  Mate‐sampling costs and sexy sons , 2015, Journal of evolutionary biology.

[37]  R. Johnstone The tactics of mutual mate choice and competitive search , 1997, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[38]  Mate sampling behaviour of black grouse females (Tetrao tetrix) , 1995, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[39]  Daniel D Wiegmann,et al.  Mate choice and optimal search behavior: fitness returns under the fixed sample and sequential search strategies. , 2010, Journal of theoretical biology.

[40]  J. M. Black,et al.  Mate-selection behaviour and sampling strategies in geese , 1993, Animal Behaviour.

[41]  T. G. Forrest,et al.  SEXUAL SELECTION AND FEMALE CHOICE IN MOLE CRICKETS (SCAPTERISCUS: GRYLLOTALPIDAE): MODELLING THE EFFECTS OF INTENSITY AND MALE SPACING , 1991 .

[42]  S. Bensch,et al.  Evidence for active female choice in a polygynous warbler , 1992, Animal Behaviour.

[43]  Crow White,et al.  Ecologists should not use statistical significance tests to interpret simulation model results , 2014 .

[44]  E. Forsgren Mate sampling in a population of sand gobies , 1997, Animal Behaviour.

[45]  H. Kokko,et al.  Unifying and Testing Models of Sexual Selection , 2006 .

[46]  A. Janetos Strategies of female mate choice: A theoretical analysis , 1980, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[47]  M. Petrie,et al.  Peahens prefer peacocks with elaborate trains , 1991, Animal Behaviour.

[48]  Call intensity is a repeatable and dominant acoustic feature determining male call attractiveness in a field cricket , 2013, Animal Behaviour.

[49]  William E. Wagner,et al.  Mate sampling strategy in a field cricket: evidence for a fixed threshold strategy with last chance option , 2011, Animal Behaviour.

[50]  Sergio Castellano,et al.  Sampling and assessment accuracy in mate choice: a random-walk model of information processing in mating decision. , 2011, Journal of theoretical biology.

[51]  D. Roff,et al.  Bias in the heritability of preference and its potential impact on the evolution of mate choice , 2015, Heredity.

[52]  T. G. Forrest,et al.  Models of female choice in acoustic communication , 1994 .

[53]  John F. Stout,et al.  Attractiveness of the maleAcheta domestica calling song to females , 1988, Journal of Comparative Physiology A.

[54]  H. Schielzeth,et al.  Choosiness, a neglected aspect of preference functions: a review of methods, challenges and statistical approaches , 2014, Journal of Comparative Physiology A.