Display options
Cite
Bath E, Wigby S, Vincent C, et al. Condition, not eyespan, predicts contest outcome in female stalk-eyed flies, Teleopsis dalmanni. Ecol Evol. 2015;5(9):1826-36doi: 10.1002/ece3.1467.
Bath, E., Wigby, S., Vincent, C., Tobias, J. A., & Seddon, N. (2015). Condition, not eyespan, predicts contest outcome in female stalk-eyed flies, Teleopsis dalmanni. Ecology and evolution, 5(9), 1826-36. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.1467
Bath, Eleanor, et al. "Condition, not eyespan, predicts contest outcome in female stalk-eyed flies, Teleopsis dalmanni." Ecology and evolution vol. 5,9 (2015): 1826-36. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.1467
Bath E, Wigby S, Vincent C, Tobias JA, Seddon N. Condition, not eyespan, predicts contest outcome in female stalk-eyed flies, Teleopsis dalmanni. Ecol Evol. 2015 May;5(9):1826-36. doi: 10.1002/ece3.1467. Epub 2015 Apr 08. PMID: 26140199; PMCID: PMC4485964.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Ecol Evol. 2015 May;5(9):1826-36. doi: 10.1002/ece3.1467. Epub 2015 Apr 08.

Condition, not eyespan, predicts contest outcome in female stalk-eyed flies, Teleopsis dalmanni.

Ecology and evolution

Eleanor Bath, Stuart Wigby, Claire Vincent, Joseph A Tobias, Nathalie Seddon

Affiliations

  1. Department of Zoology, Edward Grey Institute, University of Oxford Oxford, OX1 3PS, UK.

PMID: 26140199 PMCID: PMC4485964 DOI: 10.1002/ece3.1467

Abstract

In contests among males, body condition is often the key determinant of a successful outcome, with fighting ability signaled by so-called armaments, that is, exaggerated, condition-dependent traits. However, it is not known whether condition and exaggerated traits function in the same way in females. Here, we manipulated adult condition by varying larval nutrition in the stalk-eyed fly, Teleopsis dalmanni, a species in which eyespan is exaggerated in both sexes, and we measured the outcome of contests between females of similar or different body condition and relative eyespan. We found that females in higher condition, with both larger bodies and eyespan, won a higher proportion of encounters when competing against rivals of lower condition. However, when females were of equal condition, neither eyespan nor body length had an effect on the outcome of a contest. An analysis of previously published data revealed a similar pattern in males: individuals with large relative eyespan did not win significantly more encounters when competing with individuals of a similar body size. Contrary to expectations, and to previous findings in males, there was no clear effect of differences in body size or eyespan affecting contest duration in females. Taken together, our findings suggest that although eyespan can provide an honest indicator of condition, large eyespans provide no additional benefit to either sex in intrasexual aggressive encounters; body size is instead the most important factor.

Keywords: Armaments; Teleopsis dalmanni; female–female competition; male–male competition; mutual ornamentation; sexual selection; social selection; status signaling

References

  1. Trends Ecol Evol. 2000 Apr;15(4):149-155 - PubMed
  2. Evolution. 2001 Jul;55(7):1373-85 - PubMed
  3. Physiol Behav. 2002 Aug;76(4-5):559-66 - PubMed
  4. Evolution. 2004 May;58(5):1038-46 - PubMed
  5. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004 Aug 17;101(33):12342-7 - PubMed
  6. Mol Ecol. 2005 Oct;14(12):3787-800 - PubMed
  7. Bioessays. 2007 Mar;29(3):300-7 - PubMed
  8. Biol Lett. 2007 Dec 22;3(6):651-4 - PubMed
  9. J Evol Biol. 2007 Sep;20(5):1745-50 - PubMed
  10. J Evol Biol. 2008 Sep;21(5):1227-35 - PubMed
  11. Proc Biol Sci. 2010 Jul 7;277(1690):2035-40 - PubMed
  12. Heredity (Edinb). 2011 Jun;106(6):945-54 - PubMed
  13. J Evol Biol. 2011 Oct;24(10):2118-38 - PubMed
  14. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 2012 Feb 1;66(2):241-252 - PubMed
  15. Front Zool. 2012 Jun 25;9(1):14 - PubMed
  16. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2012 Aug 19;367(1600):2274-93 - PubMed
  17. J Exp Biol. 2013 Mar 1;216(Pt 5):771-6 - PubMed
  18. Evolution. 1980 Mar;34(2):292-305 - PubMed
  19. J Theor Biol. 1974 Sep;47(1):223-43 - PubMed
  20. J Theor Biol. 1978 Oct 7;74(3):377-88 - PubMed

Publication Types

Grant support