Skip to main content
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences logoLink to Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
. 1998 Sep 7;265(1406):1651–1657. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1998.0484

Fisherian flies: benefits of female choice in a lekking sandfly

T M Jones, R J Quinnell, A Balmford
PMCID: PMC1689344

Abstract

We experimentally investigated the fitness consequences of female mate choice in order to test the relative importance of three competing but non-exclusive hypotheses for the maintenance of pronounced female mating preferences on leks: that females benefit directly; that they gain indirect Fisherian benefits by producing more attractive sons; or that they benefit indirectly because preferred males possess 'good genes' that confer increased viability on their sons and daughters. We allowed lekking female sandflies, Lutzomyia longipalpis, to choose between males of varying attractiveness to females, and monitored the consequences for their own survival and reproductive success as well as for their offspring. In contrast to the predictions of the direct-benefits model, we found no clear sire effect on the fecundity or survival of the females themselves; females mating with more attractive males did survive longer after oviposition, but never long enough to undertake a second batch of egg laying. We also found no evidence that females gained good-genes benefits in terms of enhanced offspring survival. However, we did find that generally attractive males fathered sons who were then chosen when they in turn formed leks. Although not completely precluding other benefits, our results indicate that Fisherian benefits are at least partly responsible for maintaining female choice at L. longipalpis leks. These findings indicate the importance of testing all putative benefits concurrently in exploring the maintenance of female mate choice.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (178.2 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Able D. J. The contagion indicator hypothesis for parasite-mediated sexual selection. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1996 Mar 5;93(5):2229–2233. doi: 10.1073/pnas.93.5.2229. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Chaniotis B. N. The biology of California Phlebotomus (Diptera: Psychodidae) under laboratory conditions. J Med Entomol. 1967 May;4(2):221–233. doi: 10.1093/jmedent/4.2.221. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Dougherty M. J., Hamilton J. G., Ward R. D. Isolation of oviposition pheromone from the eggs of the sandfly Lutzomyia longipalpis. Med Vet Entomol. 1994 Apr;8(2):119–124. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2915.1994.tb00150.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Dougherty M. J., Hamilton J. G., Ward R. D. Semiochemical mediation of oviposition by the phlebotomine sandfly Lutzomyia longipalpis. Med Vet Entomol. 1993 Jul;7(3):219–224. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2915.1993.tb00680.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Elnaiem D. E., Ward R. D. Oviposition attractants and stimulants for the sandfly Lutzomyia longipalpis (Diptera: Psychodidae). J Med Entomol. 1992 Jan;29(1):5–12. doi: 10.1093/jmedent/29.1.5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Grafen A. Sexual selection unhandicapped by the Fisher process. J Theor Biol. 1990 Jun 21;144(4):473–516. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5193(05)80087-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Jarvis E. K., Rutledge L. C. Laboratory observations on mating and leklike aggregations in Lutzomyia longipalpis (Diptera: Psychodidae). J Med Entomol. 1992 Mar;29(2):171–177. doi: 10.1093/jmedent/29.2.171. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Johnstone R. A. Sexual selection, honest advertisement and the handicap principle: reviewing the evidence. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 1995 Feb;70(1):1–65. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-185x.1995.tb01439.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Killick-Kendrick R., Leaney A. J., Ready P. D. The establishment, maintenance and productivity of a laboratory colony of Lutzomyia longipalpis (Diptera: Psychodidae). J Med Entomol. 1977 Jan 31;13(4-5):429–440. doi: 10.1093/jmedent/13.4-5.429. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Kirkpatrick M., Barton N. H. The strength of indirect selection on female mating preferences. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997 Feb 18;94(4):1282–1286. doi: 10.1073/pnas.94.4.1282. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1997.0042. [DOI] [PMC free article] [Google Scholar]
  12. Rice W. R., Gaines S. D. Extending nondirectional heterogeneity tests to evaluate simply ordered alternative hypotheses. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1994 Jan 4;91(1):225–226. doi: 10.1073/pnas.91.1.225. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Welch A. M., Semlitsch R. D., Gerhardt H. C. Call duration as an indicator of genetic quality in male gray tree frogs. Science. 1998 Jun 19;280(5371):1928–1930. doi: 10.1126/science.280.5371.1928. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. von Schantz T., Göransson G., Andersson G., Fröberg I., Grahn M., Helgée A., Wittzell H. Female choice selects for a viability-based male trait in pheasants. Nature. 1989 Jan 12;337(6203):166–169. doi: 10.1038/337166a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences are provided here courtesy of The Royal Society

RESOURCES