| Title |
Why do males choose heterospecific females in the red spider mite?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Experimental and Applied Acarology, November 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10493-015-9985-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yukie Sato, Heike Staudacher, Maurice W. Sabelis |
| Abstract |
In some species, males readily show courtship behaviour towards heterospecific females and even prefer them to females of their own species. This behaviour is generally explained by indiscriminate mating to acquire more mates, but may partly be explained by male mate preference mechanisms that have developed to choose among conspecific females, as male preference for larger females causes mating with larger heterospecific females. Recently, we found that males of the red spider mite, Tetranychus evansi collected from Spain (invasive population), prefer to mate with females of the two-spotted spider mite, T. urticae rather than with conspecific females. In spider mites, mate preference for non-kin individuals has been observed. Here, we investigated if T. evansi males collected from the area of its origin (Brazil) also show preference for heterospecific females. Secondly, we investigated if mate preference of T. evansi males for heterospecific females is affected by their relatedness to conspecific females which are offered together with heterospecific females. We found that mate preference for heterospecific females exists in Brazilian T. evansi, suggesting that the preference for heterospecific females is not a lack of evolved premating isolation with an allopatric species. We found that T. evansi males showed lower propensity to mate with heterospecific females when alternative females were non-kin in the two iso-female lines collected from Brazil. However, the effect of relatedness on male mate preference was not significant. We discuss alternative hypotheses explaining why T. evansi males prefer to mate with T. urticae females. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 28 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 25% |
| Researcher | 6 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 6 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 17 | 61% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 5 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 November 2015.
All research outputs
#21,186,729
of 23,849,058 outputs
Outputs from Experimental and Applied Acarology
#718
of 914 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#241,539
of 287,645 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental and Applied Acarology
#14
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,058 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 914 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 287,645 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.