Skip to main content
Log in

Differences in preference for species-specific female calls between acoustically experienced and acoustically naive maleRibautodelphax planthoppers (Homoptera: Delphacidae)

  • Published:
Journal of Insect Behavior Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Males of the planthopper Ribautodelphax imitanswere exposed to playbacks of either conspecific or heterospecific (R. imitantoides)female calls during their development from egg to adult, and thereafter these, as well as naive males,were offered a two- way choice between these calls. Males of all treatments approached the conspecific call significantly more often. However, males primed by the conspecific call chose the heterospecific call almost four times less often than did males primed by heterospecific calls or naive males, thus showing that the preference for conspecific calls can be partly “learned.” Males primed by heterospecific calls performed very similarly to completely naive males, suggesting that the signal recognition mechanism is much less sensitive to heterospecific calls than to conspecific calls. Males with experience of the conspecific female call tended to take more time to reach the call source in the trials than both other types of males. The evolutionary implications of these findings are discussed.

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

  • Bell, W. J. (1990). Searching behavior patterns in insects.Annu. Rev. Entomol. 35: 447–467.

    Google Scholar 

  • Claridge, M. F. (1985). Acoustic behaviour of leafhoppers and planthoppers. In Nault, L. R., and Rodriguez, L. R. (eds.),The Leafhoppers and Planthoppers, John Wiley and Sons, New York, pp. 103–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Claridge, M. F., Den Hollander, J., and Morgan, J. C. (1985a). Variation in courtship signals and hybridization between geographically definable populations of the rice Brown planthopper,Nilaparvata lugens (Stål).Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 24: 35–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Claridge, M. F., Den Hollander, J., and Morgan, J. C. (1985b). The status of weed-associated populations of the brown planthopper,Nilaparvata lugens (Stål)—host race or biological species?Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 84: 77–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Winter, A. J. (1992). The genetic basis and evolution of acoustic mate recognition signals in aRibautodelphax planthopper (Homoptera, Delphacidae). 1. The female call.J. Evol. Biol. 5: 249–265.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Winter, A. J., and Rollenhagen, T. (1990). The importance of male and female acoustic behaviour for sexual isolation inRibautodelphax planthoppers (Homoptera, Delphacidae).Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 40: 191–206.

    Google Scholar 

  • Den Bieman, C. F. M. (1986). Acoustic differentiation and variation in planthoppers of the genusRibautodelphax (Homoptera, Delphacidae).Neth. J. Zool. 36: 461–480.

    Google Scholar 

  • Den Bieman, C. F. M. (1987). Host plant relations in the planthopper genusRibautodelphax (Homoptera, Delphacidae).Ecol. Ent. 12: 163–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Den Biemen, C. F. M. (1988). Hybridization studies in the planthopper genusRibautodelphax (Homoptera, Delphacidae).Genetica 76: 15–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heady, S. E., and Denno, R. F. (1991). Reproductive isolation inProkelisia planthoppers (Homoptera: Delphacidae): Acoustic differentiation and hybridization failure.J. Insect Behav. 4: 367–390.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGuire, T. R. (1984). Learning in three species of Diptera: The blow flyPhormia regina, the fruit flyDrosophila melanogaster, and the house flyMusca domestica.Behav. Genet. 14: 479–526.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • O'Hara, E., Pruzan, A., and Ehrman, L. (1976). Ethological isolation and mating experience inDrosophila paulistorum.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 73: 975–976.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Papaj, D. R., and Prokopy, R. J. (1989). Ecological and evolutionary aspects of learning in phytophagous insects.Annu. Rev. Entomol. 34: 315–350.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paterson, H. E. H. (1978). More evidence against speciation by reinforcement.S. Afr. J. Sci. 74: 369–371.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paterson, H. E. H. (1985). The recognition concept of species. In Vrba, E. S. (ed.),Species and Speciation, Transvaal Museum Monograph 4, Pretoria, pp. 21–29.

  • Pruzan, A., Ehrman, L., Perelle, I., and Probber, J. (1979). Sexual selection,Drosophila age and experience.Experientia 35: 1023–1025

    Google Scholar 

  • Sene, F. M. (1977). Effect of social isolation on behavior ofD. ilvestris from HawaiiProc. Haw. Entomol. Soc. 22: 469–474

    Google Scholar 

  • Shuvalov, V. F., Rüting, T., and Popov, A. V. (1990). The influence of auditory and visual experience on phonotactic behavior of the cricket,Gryllus bimaculatus.J. Insect Behav. 3: 289–302

    Google Scholar 

  • Templeton, A. R. (1980). The theory of speciationvia the founder principle.Genetics 94: 1011–1038

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

De Winter, A.J., Rollenhagen, T. Differences in preference for species-specific female calls between acoustically experienced and acoustically naive maleRibautodelphax planthoppers (Homoptera: Delphacidae). J Insect Behav 6, 411–419 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01048120

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01048120

Key words

Navigation