Nuptial feeding encompasses any form of nutrient transfer from the male to the female during or directly after courtship and\or copulation. In insects, nuptial gifts may take the form of food captured or collected by the male, parts, or even the whole of the male's body, or glandular products of the male such as salivary secretions, external glandular secretions, the spermatophore and substances in the ejaculate. Over the past decade, there has been considerable debate over the current function of nuptial feeding in insects. This debate has centred on the issue of whether nuptial gifts function as paternal investment (i.e. function to increase the fitness and\or number of the gift-giving male's own offspring) or as mating effort (i.e. function to attract females, facilitate coupling, and\or to maximize ejaculate transfer), although the two hypotheses are not mutually exclusive. In the present article, evidence for the potential of nuptial gifts to function as either paternal investment, mating effort, or both is reviewed for each form of nuptial feeding in each insect taxon for which sufficient data are available. Empirical evidence suggests that many diverse forms of nuptial feeding in different insect taxa function, at least in part, as mating effort. For example, nuptial prey and salivary masses in the Mecoptera, regurgitated food in Drosophila (Diptera), hind-wing feeding in Cyphoderris (Orthoptera) and the secretion of the male's cephalic gland in Neopyrochroa (Coleoptera) and Zorotypus (Zoraptera) appear to function to entice females to copulate and\or to facilitate coupling. Nuptial prey and salivary masses in the Mecoptera also appear to function to maximize ejaculate transfer (which is also a form of mating effort), as do nuptial prey in Empis (Diptera), external glandular secretions in Oecanthus and Allonemobius (Orthoptera) and the spermatophylax in gryllids and tettigoniids (Orthoptera). Large spermatophores in, for example, the Lepidoptera and Coleoptera, also appear to be maintained by selection on the male to maximize ejaculate transfer and thereby counter the effects of sperm competition. In contrast to the large amount of evidence in support of the mating effort hypothesis, there is a relative lack of good evidence to support the paternal investment hypothesis. Certain studies have demonstrated an increase in the weight and\or number of eggs laid as a result of the receipt of larger gifts, or a greater number of gifts, in tettigoniids, gryllids, acridids, mantids, bruchid beetles, drosophilids and lepidopterans. However, virtually all of these studies (with the possible exception of studies of the spermatophylax in tettigoniids) have failed to control adequately for hormonal substances in the ejaculate that are known to affect female reproductive output. Furthermore, in at least four tettigoniids (but not in the case of two species), three lepidopterans, a drosophilid and probably also bruchid beetles and bittacids, evidence suggests that the male has a low probability of fertilising the eggs tha...

It is becoming increasingly clear that the evolutionary interests of the sexes are often in conflict when it comes to mating. Sexual encounters involving nuptial gifts, however, have often been viewed as prime examples of sexual co-operation, rather than conflict. In this review, I explore the proposition that nuptial gifts act as sensory traps: by exploiting the female's gustatory responses, the male may be able to entice females to accept superfluous matings and/or transfer greater volumes of ejaculate than are in the female's reproductive interests. Evidence suggests that the females' sensory biases may have played an important role in shaping gift characteristics in at least four different systems, although relatively few forms of nuptial feeding have so far been examined from this perspective. I argue that gift composition is more likely to be tailored to increasing the attractiveness of the gift to the female and/or maximizing gift handling time than to suit the female's nutritional needs and that the fecundity-enhancing benefits of nuptial gifts are often questionable and have been over-stated in the literature. Fertilization biases associated with the female's attraction to the nuptial gift, however, could lead to in-direct benefits for the female. On the other hand, nuptial feeding may also lead to significant costs to the female. Evidence suggests that some types of gift entice the female to mate, but it is not clear whether the resultant degree of polyandry is higher than optimal for the female. In other cases, evidence suggests that the gift enables the male to overcome the resistance of the female to accepting an extra large ejaculate and that large ejaculates are associated with longer post-mating sexual refractory periods in the female. This could represent a cost to the female by delaying or preventing her from receiving the genetic benefits of polyandry. At present, it is not clear, however, whether such costs outweigh the potential benefits of nuptial feeding for the female

In numerous insects, including bushcrickets (Tettigoniidae), males are known to transfer substances in the ejaculate that inhibit the receptivity of females to further matings, but it has not yet been established whether these substances reduce the lifetime degree of polyandry of the female. The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that larger ejaculate volumes should be associated with a lower degree of polyandry across tettigoniid taxa, controlling for male body mass and phylogeny. Data on ejaculate mass, sperm number, nuptial gift mass and male mass were taken primarily from the literature. The degree of polyandry for 14 species of European bushcrickets was estimated by counting the number of spermatodoses within the spermathecae of field-caught females towards the end of their adult lifespans. Data for four further species were obtained from the literature. Data were analysed by using both species regression and independent contrasts to control for phylogeny. Multiple regression analysis revealed that, as predicted, there was a significant negative association between the degree of polyandry and ejaculate mass, relative to male body mass, across bushcricket taxa. Nuptial gift size and sperm number, however, did not contribute further to interspecific variation in the degree of polyandry. A positive relationship was found, across bushcricket taxa, between relative nuptial gift size and relative ejaculate mass, indicating that larger nuptial gifts allow the male to overcome female resistance to accepting large ejaculates. This appears to be the first comparative evidence that males can manipulate the lifetime degree of polyandry of their mates through the transfer of large ejaculates.

Nuptial feeding encompasses any form of nutrient transfer from the male to the female during or directly after courtship and/or copulation. In insects, nuptial gifts may take the form of food captured or collected by the male, parts, or even the whole of the male's body, or glandular products of the male such as salivary secretions, external glandular secretions, the spermatophore and substances in the ejaculate. Over the past decade, there has been considerable debate over the current function of nuptial feeding in insects. This debate has centred on the issue of whether nuptial gifts function as paternal investment (i.e. function to increase the fitness and/or number of the gift-giving male's own offspring) or as mating effort (i.e. function to attract females, facilitate coupling, and/or to maximize ejaculate transfer), although the two hypotheses are not mutually exclusive. In the present article, evidence for the potential of nuptial gifts to function as either paternal investment, mating effort, or both is reviewed for each form of nuptial feeding in each insect taxon for which sufficient data are available. Empirical evidence suggests that many diverse forms of nuptial feeding in different insect taxa function, at least in part, as mating effort. For example, nuptial prey and salivary masses in the Mecoptera, regurgitated food in Drosophila (Diptera), hind-wing feeding in Cyphoderris (Orthoptera) and the secretion of the male's cephalic gland in Neopyrochroa (Coleoptera) and Zorotypus (Zoraptera) appear to function to entice females to copulate and/or to facilitate coupling. Nuptial prey and salivary masses in the Mecoptera also appear to function to maximize ejaculate transfer (which is also a form of mating effort), as do nuptial prey in Empis (Diptera), external glandular secretions in Oecanthus and Allonemobius (Orthoptera) and the spermatophylax in gryllids and tettigoniids (Orthoptera). Large spermatophores in, for example, the Lepidoptera and Coleoptera, also appear to be maintained by selection on the male to maximize ejaculate transfer and thereby counter the effects of sperm competition. In contrast to the large amount of evidence in support of the mating effort hypothesis, there is a relative lack of good evidence to support the paternal investment hypothesis. Certain studies have demonstrated an increase in the weight and/or number of eggs laid as a result of the receipt of larger gifts, or a greater number of gifts, in tettigoniids, gryllids, acridids, mantids, bruchid beetles, drosophilids and lepidopterans. However, virtually all of these studies (with the possible exception of studies of the spermatophylax in tettigoniids) have failed to control adequately for hormonal substances in the ejaculate that are known to affect female reproductive output. Furthermore, in at least four tettigoniids (but not in the case of two species), three lepidopterans, a drosophilid and probably also bruchid beetles and bittacids, evidence suggests that the male has a low probability of fertilising the eggs tha...

Uniquely positioned at the intersection of sexual selection, nutritional ecology and life-history theory, nuptial gifts are widespread and diverse. Despite extensive empirical study, we still have only a rudimentary understanding of gift evolution because we lack a unified conceptual framework for considering these traits. In this opinion piece, we tackle several issues that we believe have substantively hindered progress in this area. Here, we: (i) present a comprehensive definition and classification scheme for nuptial gifts (including those transferred by simultaneous hermaphrodites), (ii) outline evolutionary predictions for different gift types, and (iii) highlight some research directions to help facilitate progress in this field.