Copulatory Behavior as Courtship Communication

Abstract

In the copulatory behavior of many species of rodents, mounting patterns with ejaculation are preceded by mounts with nonejaculatory intromissions. Although not directly related to insemination, these intromissions have generally been treated as “copulatory” behavior. If we treat these nonejaculatory intromissions as courtship communication in the tactile modality, new relationships become apparent. Within the context of classical ethology, intromissions can be considered in relation to both proximate dynamics and ultimate effects. Within the sociobiological/behavioral‐ecological context, intromissions can be viewed in relation to manipulation, female assessment and choice, and honesty of communication. The intromissions synchronize, persuade, and orient at the same time as they manipulate the partner.

Female cooperation in plug formation in a spider: effects of male copulatory courtship

“…Another suggestion that palpal insertion patterns may be associated with possible CFC comes from the association of irregular patterns of insertion in a wolf spider with reduced suppression of subsequent female resistance to further copulations (Gonzalez and Costa 2008). Intromission patterns are also known to influence female reproductive decisions in rodents and primates (Diamond 1970;Dewsbury 1972Dewsbury , 1988Dixson 1998). In 2 species of pholcid spiders, the number and rate of squeezes with the palps (rather than insertions and withdrawals) affect paternity (Schafer and Uhl 2002;Peretti et al 2006); in one and perhaps both of these species, the effects are probably due to female rather than male sperm manipulation (Peretti A, Eberhard WG, unpublished data).…”

Experiments with genitalia: a commentary

“…Although male genitalia are often more or less hidden inside the female during copulation, there are several partial solutions to this problem. The most effective technique is direct observation of male genital structures that contact only the outer surface of the female and that are thus not hidden inside her, or those that are periodically withdrawn from her [19,23,[32][33][34][35][36][37]. Other techniques for studying male genital structures that remain inside the female include flash freezing at different stages of copulation [14,16,28,[34][35][36]; observation through the semi-transparent body wall of the female [38]; observation of artificially induced behavior of intromittent genitalia via electric shocks [39]; partial anesthesia of the male [40]; stimulation of the genitalia after removing the head of the male [41]; and X-ray video recordings [41] (interpretation of the significance of genital form and behavior resulting from artificial inflation or erection outside the female needs care, however, because the genitalia of some groups assume quite different forms when they are constrained during copulation by contact with the female [42]).…”

Pattern of ovulation in the East African root rat (Tachyoryctes splendens) from Tanzania: induced or spontaneous ovulator?

“…Experimental animals were observed copulating approximately 5 days after the pairing of females with males; the first four days were preceded by agonistic behaviour and the general avoidance of one another. Copulation has been reported to induce ovulation following penile intromission in a number of mammals (Dewsbury 1972(Dewsbury , 1988.…”