Fighting success and attractiveness as predictors of male mating success in the black field cricket, Teleogryllus commodus: the effectiveness of no-choice tests

Shackleton, Michelle A.; Jennions, Michael D.; Hunt, John

doi:10.1007/s00265-004-0907-1

Cited by 172 publications

(199 citation statements)

References 63 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

187

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The model showed that recognition and discrimination tests provided an inaccurate description of mating preferences, because they introduced systematic errors that either attenuated (recognition tests) or exaggerated (discrimination test) the true differences in mating preference. In contrast, the latency-ratio test performed much better than the recognition and discrimination tests, emphasizing the importance of time responses in assessing female mating preferences Leonard and Hedrick, 2010;Rebar et al, 2011;Shackleton et al, 2005), as already shown in other contexts of choice (i.e. food preferences Bateson and Kacelnik, 1995;Reboreda and Kacelnik, 1991).…”

Section: Sequential Sampling Models Of Mate Choicementioning

confidence: 61%

Computational mate choice: Theory and empirical evidence

Castellano

Cadeddu

Cermelli

2012

Behavioural Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tThe present review is based on the thesis that mate choice results from information-processing mechanisms governed by computational rules and that, to understand how females choose their mates, we should identify which are the sources of information and how they are used to make decisions. We describe mate choice as a three-step computational process and for each step we present theories and review empirical evidence. The first step is a perceptual process. It describes the acquisition of evidence, that is, how females use multiple cues and signals to assign an attractiveness value to prospective mates (the preference function hypothesis). The second step is a decisional process. It describes the construction of the decision variable (DV), which integrates evidence (private information by direct assessment), priors (public information), and value (perceived utility) of prospective mates into a quantity that is used by a decision rule (DR) to produce a choice. We make the assumption that females are optimal Bayesian decision makers and we derive a formal model of DV that can explain the effects of preference functions, mate copying, social context, and females' state and condition on the patterns of mate choice. The third step of mating decision is a deliberative process that depends on the DRs. We identify two main categories of DRs (absolute and comparative rules), and review the normative models of mate sampling tactics associated to them. We highlight the limits of the normative approach and present a class of computational models (sequential-sampling models) that are based on the assumption that DVs accumulate noisy evidence over time until a decision threshold is reached. These models force us to rethink the dichotomy between comparative and absolute decision rules, between discrimination and recognition, and even between rational and irrational choice. Since they have a robust biological basis, we think they may represent a useful theoretical tool for behavioural ecologist interested in integrating proximate and ultimate causes of mate choice.

show abstract

Section: Sequential Sampling Models Of Mate Choicementioning

confidence: 61%

Computational mate choice: Theory and empirical evidence

Castellano

Cadeddu

Cermelli

2012

Behavioural Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As in several other field cricket species (Simmons 1987b;Bateman 1998), latency to mating in male T. commodus is a useful indicator of attractiveness (Shackleton et al 2005). Previously, "no-choice" trials showed that the time taken for a female to successfully mount a male after the onset of male courtship is a reliable predictor of male mating success in T. commodus, both in the short term (93% of mountings lead to spermatophore transfer within 2-hours) and longer term (males with the shortest latency to mounting obtained significantly more matings over a 3-day period) (Shackleton et al 2005).…”

Section: Assessing Male Attractivenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previously, "no-choice" trials showed that the time taken for a female to successfully mount a male after the onset of male courtship is a reliable predictor of male mating success in T. commodus, both in the short term (93% of mountings lead to spermatophore transfer within 2-hours) and longer term (males with the shortest latency to mounting obtained significantly more matings over a 3-day period) (Shackleton et al 2005). Moreover, latency to mounting a given male was significantly repeatable (0.50 ± 0.02) (Shackleton et al 2005).…”

Section: Assessing Male Attractivenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sexual Conflict and Cryptic Female Choice in the Black Field Cricket, Teleogryllus Commodus

Bussière

Hunt

Jennions

et al. 2006

Evol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…One of the reasons for this is the difficulty of allowing males to reproduce with females without reintroducing the effect of male-male competition (Houde 1988;Shackleton et al 2005). However, if females have some control over mating, it is possible to allow single males of differing status access to females and to compare some measure of mating success between preferred and non-preferred males.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, if females have some control over mating, it is possible to allow single males of differing status access to females and to compare some measure of mating success between preferred and non-preferred males. Such experiments are described in the literature as no choice tests (Shackleton et al 2005). Measures of mating success usually involve scoring the time until the first copulation, the number of times a female copulates with a male, or the number of sexual responses from a female (Pilastro et al 2002;Shackleton et al 2005).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%