Skip to main content
Log in

A lover, not a fighter: mating causes male crickets to lose fights

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

Abstract

Both resource-holding potential (RHP) and experience in aggressive contests are known to affect future aggressive behaviour. However, few studies have examined the effects of mating experience on agonistic behaviour, despite the fact that dominant males usually acquire more matings. We investigated the effect of mating experience on male aggressive behaviour including the relationship between RHP and fighting success in the fall field cricket, Gryllus pennsylvanicus. We formed pairs of size- and age-matched males that varied in RHP (relative weapon size) and conducted two experiments. In the first, we varied male mating experience by allowing one male in a pair to either be (a) ‘mated’: court, be mounted and copulate with a virgin female or (b) ‘experienced’: court, be mounted, but prevented from copulating. The second experiment varied postcopulatory experience where the male was allowed (‘contact’) or prevented from (‘no-contact’) continued contact with his recent mate. Following treatment, experimental males engaged in an aggressive contest with the naïve size- and age-matched male. In our first experiment, we found that mated and experienced males were equally likely to escalate contests to combat with a naïve opponent, but mated males were less likely than experienced males to win. There was no effect of mating on the relationship between RHP and fighting success. In our second experiment, we found no effect of maintaining contact with the female on the tendency to escalate or the probability of winning. As in the first experiment, males with relatively larger heads again won more fights and this relationship was unaffected by male experience. These results suggest that mating is itself detrimental to male success in aggressive contests, but that this effect is not sufficient to eliminate the effect of RHP on fighting success.

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.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alexander RD (1961) Aggressiveness, territoriality, and sexual behavior in field crickets (Orthoptera: Gryllidae). Behaviour 17:130–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersson M (1994) Sexual selection. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Arlington LC (1929) Cricket culture in China. China J 10:135–142

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnott G, Elwood RW (2008) Information gathering and decision making about resource value in animal contests. Anim Behav 76:529–542

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown WD, Smith AT, Moskalik B, Gabriel J (2006) Aggressive contests in house crickets: size, motivation and the information content of aggressive songs. Anim Behav 72:225–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown WD, Chimenti AJ, Siebert JR (2007) The payoff of fighting in house crickets: motivational asymmetry increases male aggression and mating success. Ethology 113:457–465

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bussière LF, Hunt J, Jennions MD, Brooks R (2006) Sexual conflict and cryptic female choice in the black field cricket, Teleogryllus commodus. Evolution 60:792–800

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cade W (1979) The evolution of alternative male reproductive strategies in field crickets. In: Blum MS, Blum NA (eds) Sexual selection and reproductive competition in insects. Academic, New York, pp 343–379

    Google Scholar 

  • Cornwallis CK, Uller T (2010) Towards an evolutionary ecology of sexual traits. Trends Ecol Evol 25:145–152

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Darwin C (1871) The descent of man and selection in relation to sex. Murray, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Enquist M, Leimar O (1987) Evolution of fighting behaviour: effect of variation in resource value. J Theor Biol 127:187–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer GJ (1997) Abstention from sex and other pre-game rituals used by college male varsity athletes. J Sport Behav 20:176–184

    Google Scholar 

  • Grafen A (1987) The logic of divisively asymmetric contests: respect for ownership and the desperado effect. Anim Behav 35:462–467

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hack MA (1997a) Assessment strategies in the contests of male crickets, Acheta domesticus (L.). Anim Behav 53:733–747

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hack MA (1997b) The energetic costs of fighting in the house cricket, Acheta domesticus L. Behav Ecol 8:28–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofmann HA, Schildberger K (2001) Assessment of strength and willingness to fight during aggressive encounters in crickets. Anim Behav 62:337–348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofmann HA, Stevenson PA (2000) Flight restores fight in crickets. Nature 403:613

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hood GM (2009) PopTools version 3.1.1. Available on the internet. URL http://www.cse.csiro.au/poptools

  • Hsu Y-C (1928–1929) Crickets in China. Peking Soc Nat Hist Bull 3:5–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsu YY, Earley RL, Wolf LL (2006) Modulation of aggressive behaviour by fighting experience: mechanisms and contest outcomes. Biol Rev 81:33–74

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Huntingford FA, Turner AK (1987) Animal conflict. Chapman and Hall, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Judge KA (2010) Female social experience affects the shape of sexual selection on males. Evol Ecol Res 12:389–402

    Google Scholar 

  • Judge KA, Bonanno VL (2008) Male weaponry in a fighting cricket. PLoS ONE 3:e3980

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly CD (2008a) The interrelationships between resource-holding potential, resource-value and reproductive success in territorial males: how much variation can we explain? Behav Ecol Sociobiol 62:855–871

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly CD (2008b) Why do male tree weta aggressively evict females from galleries after mating? Ethology 114:203–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kemp DJ (2006) Ageing, reproductive value, and the evolution of lifetime fighting behaviour. Biol J Linn Soc 88:565–578

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khazraïe K, Campan M (1999) The role of prior agonistic experience in dominance relationships in male crickets Gryllus bimaculatus (Orthoptera: Gryllidae). Behav Process 44:341–348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Killian KA, Allen JR (2008) Mating resets male cricket aggression. J Insect Behav 21:535–548

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kortet R, Hedrick A (2005) The scent of dominance: female field crickets use odour to predict the outcome of male competition. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 59:77–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Le Boeuf BJ, Peterson RS (1969) Social status and mating activity in elephant seals. Science 163:91–93

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Loher W, Dambach M (1989) Reproductive behavior. In: Huber F, Moore TE, Loher W (eds) Cricket behavior and neurobiology. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, pp 1–42

    Google Scholar 

  • Loher W, Rence B (1978) Mating behavior of Teleogryllus commodus (Walker) and its central and peripheral control. Z Tierpsychol 46:225–259

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maynard Smith J, Price GR (1973) Logic of animal conflict. Nature 246:15–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGlone S, Shrier I (2000) Does sex the night before competition decrease performance? Clin J Sport Med 10:233–234

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Parker GA (1974) Assessment strategy and the evolution of fighting behaviour. J Theor Biol 47:223–243

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rantala MJ, Kortet R (2004) Male dominance and immunocompetence in a field cricket. Behav Ecol 15:187–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shackleton MA, Jennions MD, Hunt J (2005) Fighting success and attractiveness as predictors of male mating success in the black field cricket, Teleogryllus commodus: the effectiveness of no-choice tests. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 58:1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simmons LW (1986) Inter-male competition and mating success in the field cricket, Gryllus bimaculatus (De Geer). Anim Behav 34:567–579

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simmons LW (1988) The contribution of multiple mating and spermatophore consumption to the lifetime reproductive success of female field crickets (Gryllus bimaculatus). Ecol Entomol 13:57–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Souroukis K, Cade WH (1993) Reproductive competition and selection on male traits at varying sex-ratios in the field cricket, Gryllus pennsylvanicus. Behaviour 126:45–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suga Y (2006) Chinese cricket-fighting. Int J Asian Stud 3:77–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tachon G, Murray A-M, Gray DA, Cade WH (1999) Agonistic displays and the benefits of fighting in the field cricket, Gryllus bimaculatus. J Insect Behav 12:533–543

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas ML, Simmons LW (2010) Cuticular hydrocarbons influence female attractiveness to males in the Australian field cricket, Teleogryllus oceanicus. J Evol Biol 23:707–714

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tregenza T, Wedell N (1997) Definitive evidence for cuticular pheromones in a cricket. Anim Behav 54:979–984

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vahed K (1998) The function of nuptial feeding in insects: a review of empirical studies. Biol Rev 73:43–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner WE Jr (2005) Male field crickets that provide reproductive benefits to females incur higher costs. Ecol Entomol 30:350–357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner WE Jr, Kelley RJ, Tucker KR, Harper CJ (2001) Females receive a life-span benefit from male ejaculates in a field cricket. Evolution 55:994–1001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wynn H, Vahed K (2004) Male Gryllus bimaculatus guard females to delay them from mating with rival males and obtain repeated copulations. J Insect Behav 17:53–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zuk M (1987) The effects of gregarine parasites, body size, and time of day on spermatophore production and sexual selection in field crickets. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 21:65–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zuk M, Simmons LW (1997) Reproductive strategies of the crickets (Orthoptera: Gryllidae). In: Choe JC, Crespi BJ (eds) The evolution of mating systems in insects and arachnids. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 89–109

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Darryl Gwynne, Murray McConnell, Chris Reaume, and two anonymous referees for helpful comments on earlier drafts. We acknowledge funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) for a Post-Graduate Scholarship to KAJ and an NSERC Discovery Grant to Darryl Gwynne.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kevin A. Judge.

Additional information

Communicated by M. Siva-Jothy

Kevin A. Judge and Janice J. Ting contributed equally to this work.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Judge, K.A., Ting, J.J., Schneider, J. et al. A lover, not a fighter: mating causes male crickets to lose fights. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 64, 1971–1979 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-010-1008-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-010-1008-y

Keywords

Navigation