Males of many insects directly defend their mates from rival males (i.e. mate guard) as a way to avoid sperm competition and thus increase their reproductive success. However, mate guarding may have associated costs for these males. We examined costs of mate guarding in Japanese beetles (Popillia japonica), a pest species which exhibits post-copulatory mate guarding during which the guarding male cannot feed. In this species, food provides both energy and water for thermoregulation. Consequently, we focused on possible thermoregulatory and energetic costs of their mate guarding. In a field study, we found that guarding males had significantly higher thoracic temperatures than non-guarding males, indicating a difference in their ability and/or need to thermoregulate. Paired males had significantly lower water levels than single males in the morning and evening, but not in the afternoon. In the laboratory, we found that mate-guarding duration was significantly shorter at higher ambient temperature than at lower temperature, and males that had been starved guarded for less time than males that had not been starved. Our results suggest that because guarding males are unable to feed, they suffer energetic and thermoregulatory costs that appear to limit the amount of time that they can guard a female.

Polyembryonic parasitoids producing single‐sex broods of clonal offspring provide an unusually clear window into the classic tradeoff between the number and size of offspring. We conducted a laboratory study of the encyrtid parasitoid Copidosoma bakeri parasitizing the noctuid Agrotis ipsilon to examine the way that size and number of offspring tradeoff in broods of each sex and to determine how the fit between host and parasitoid brood is achieved. We found that brood mass (wasp body mass ×brood size) was proportional to host mass, independent of brood sex, indicating a tight fit between brood and host and ensuring a size–number tradeoff. By correcting brood size and body mass of each brood for host mass, we demonstrated the expected inverse relationship between wasp variables. We postulated that the wasp brood might achieve the fit to the host by (1) adjusting brood size based on information available early in host development before and during division of the embryo, (2) manipulating host size late in host development after completion of embryo division, or (3) simply adjusting individual wasp mass to fill the host. We evaluated host responses to parasitism – and correlations between brood size and host growth early and late in development – for broods of each sex. The data are consistent with adjustment of brood size to the amount of host growth early in host development and with manipulation of host mass late in host development. The tight link between host mass and brood mass also suggests a final adjustment by parasitoid growth to achieve complete filling. Within the tight fit, female broods were smaller but contained larger individuals than male broods. The sex‐specific balance point of the tradeoff and sex differences in balancing mechanisms and responses to host size suggest different selection pressures on each sex requiring future investigation.

Tradeoffs – negative reciprocal causal relationships in net benefits between trait magnitudes – have not always been studied in depth appropriate to their central role in life‐history analysis. Here we focus on allocation tradeoffs, in which acquisition of a limiting resource requires allocation of resource to alternative traits. We identify the components of this allocation process and emphasize the importance of quantifying them. We then propose categorizing allocation tradeoffs into linear, concave and convex relationships based on the way that resource allocation yields trait magnitudes under the tradeoff. Linear relationships are over‐represented in the literature because of typically small data sets over restricted ranges of trait magnitudes, an emphasis on simple correlation analysis, and a failure to remove variation associated with acquisition of the limiting resource in characterizing the tradeoff. (We provide methods for controlling these acquisition effects.) Non‐linear relationships have been documented and are expected under plausible conditions that we summarize. We note ways that shifting environments and biological features yield plasticity of tradeoff graphs. Finally, we illustrate these points using case studies and close with priorities for future work.

No abstract