Temporal migration patterns and mating tactics influence size-assortative mating in Rana temporaria

Dittrich, Carolin; Rodríguez, Ariel; Segev, Ori; Drakulić, Sanja; Feldhaar, Heike; Vences, Miguel; Rödel, Mark‐Oliver

doi:10.1093/beheco/arx188

Cited by 28 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 77 publications

(126 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is well documented that body size is an important trait for sexual selection and for defining territory (see Robertson, 1986;Wells, 2010;Dittrich et al, 2018), but our study did not show any spatial organization based on this trait. Usually, larger males are more successful in physical combat, and thus are more able to occupy better locations during best periods of the breeding season (Berec, 2017;Clause, 2017;Dias et al, 2017;Ospina-L. et al, 2017).…”

Section: Temporal and Spatial Social Structurecontrasting

confidence: 85%

Seasonal Reproductive Dynamics of a Lek-Breeding Neotropical Treefrog is not Organized by Male Size (Anura, Hylidae)

Pompeu

Sá

Haddad

2020

South American Journal of Herpetology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Temporal and Spatial Social Structurecontrasting

confidence: 85%

Seasonal Reproductive Dynamics of a Lek-Breeding Neotropical Treefrog is not Organized by Male Size (Anura, Hylidae)

Pompeu

Sá

Haddad

2020

South American Journal of Herpetology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Mate assortments are usually not expected to be conserved among populations because mating signals can be influenced by ecological conditions, such as body size in intertidal snails (Rolán-Alvarez et al 2015) and coloured ornaments in blue tits (Fargevieille et al 2017). Spatial variation in the intensity and direction of SAM has been extensively reported across a variety of animal groups, such as amphibians (Dittrich et al 2018), crustaceans (Ribeiro et al 2010), gastropods (Ng et al 2016), fishes (Mobley et al 2014), insects (McLain 1985, mammals (Baldwin & Damon 1973) and spiders (Bel-Venner et al 2008 see Supplementary Information S7 for a comprehensive list of studies). However, the particular sources of variation in sexual traits that promote spatial and temporal changes in the strength and direction of assortative mating have yet to be assessed for most animal species.…”

Section: Consistency Assortative Mating Patternsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assortative mating in space and time: patterns and biases

Moura

Gonzaga

Pinto³

et al. 2021

Ecology Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the important roles of assortative mating for understanding evolutionary processes, our knowledge on the variation in assortative mating across populations and breeding periods has been overshadowed by the greater attention given to general patterns. Obtaining data on mating pairs are difficult for most species; therefore, researchers often group data from different populations or breeding periods, which can increase positive biases in detecting and estimating assortative mating. We used a meta‐analytic approach to investigate the biases caused by spatially or temporally pooling data and the assortative mating consistency across populations and breeding periods. We describe assortative mating patterns across and within animal taxa. We performed a systematic review to search studies reporting measures of size‐assortative mating (SAM). Grouping data from multiple populations and seasons incurred positive biases. Overall, assortative mating moderately exhibited low repeatability in space and time, but it was inconsistent for most taxa. After excluding pooled measures, the average estimate for assortative mating was moderate and positive. Thus, our findings demonstrate that pooling data can produce misleading results. We also highlight the importance of further investigation of hypotheses that explain spatial and temporal variation in assortative mating, after its detection. Our study reinforces the significance of investigating mating patterns at various spatial and temporal scales before drawing broad conclusions.

show abstract

“…Indeed explosive breeders have been reported to exhibit high intraspecific variability of mating patterns between and within population, i.e. with respect to large male advantage, different mating tactics and size-assortment, due to high variability in mate availability, as well as intrasexual competition and environmental conditions (Olson et al 1986;Vieites et al 2004;Vojar et al 2015;Dittrich et al 2018). Male mate choice as well as its absence was found in .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Larger is not better: No mate preference by European Common Frog (Rana temporaria) males

Dittrich

oumldel

2021

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

According to classical sexual selection theory, females are the choosy sex in most species. Choosiness is defined as the individual effort to invest energy and time to assess potential mates. In explosive breeding anurans, high intrasexual competition between males leads to a sexual coercion ruled mating system, where males could have evolved preferences for specific female traits. In the current study, we tested male mating preference in the explosive breeding European Common Frog without intrasexual competition. We hypothesized that males show preferences towards larger female body size in the absence of male competition. We conducted mate choice experiments, placing a male and two differently sized females in a box and recorded their mating behavior. Males did not show any preference considering female body size, neither in the attempt to grab a female nor during the formation of pairs. We witnessed a high failure rate of male mating attempts, which might make the evolution of mate choice too costly. However, small males are faster in attempting females, which could be an alternative strategy to get access to females, because their larger competitors have an advantage during scramble competition. Nonetheless, in successfully formed pairs, the females were on average larger than the males, an observation which deviated from our null-model where pairs should be of similar size if mating would be random. This indicates that selection takes place, independent from male mating preference or scramble competition.

show abstract

Temporal migration patterns and mating tactics influence size-assortative mating in Rana temporaria

Cited by 28 publications

References 77 publications

Seasonal Reproductive Dynamics of a Lek-Breeding Neotropical Treefrog is not Organized by Male Size (Anura, Hylidae)

Seasonal Reproductive Dynamics of a Lek-Breeding Neotropical Treefrog is not Organized by Male Size (Anura, Hylidae)

Assortative mating in space and time: patterns and biases

Larger is not better: No mate preference by European Common Frog (Rana temporaria) males

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About