Patterns of Copulatory Behavior in Male Mammals

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of these species, the effects are probably due to female rather than male sperm manipulation (Peretti A, Eberhard WG, unpublished data).…”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contact only the outer surface of the female and that are thus not hidden inside her, or those that are periodically withdrawn from her [19,23,[32][33][34][35][36][37].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]).…”

Handedness and laterality in humans and other animals

“…The positive reinforcement system is in essentially the same place and the effects of stimulating it electrically are very similar in goldfish, pigeons, chickens, rats, rabbits, guinea pigs, cats, dogs, monkeys, porpoises, and humans (Valenstein, 1973), in spite of the fact that vertebrates differ substantially in respect to which naturally occurring stimuli act as reinforcers. Likewise, mammalian species differ from one another in almost every measurable dimension of their sex behavior (Dewsbury, 1972(Dewsbury, , 1975, but sex behavior in all species depends on the integrity of the preoptic nucleus. Destruction of the ventromedial nucleus in the hypothalamus makes mammals fat and mean, no matter what their species-specific patterns of eating and fighting behavior may be.…”