4.5 Article

Evolution of female colour polymorphism in damselflies:: testing the hypotheses

Journal

ANIMAL BEHAVIOUR
Volume 63, Issue -, Pages 677-685

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1006/anbe.2001.1948

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The existence of several female colour morphs is a conspicuous characteristic of many damselflies that show one male-like (androchrome) and several nonmale-like (gynochrome) morphs. We tested several adaptive hypotheses and the null model for the maintenance of female polychromatism (one androchrome and two gynochromes) in the damselfly Ceriagrion tenellum. We tested the null model by comparing the degree of genetic differentiation between the colour locus and a set of 19 neutral RAPD loci in five populations. Our results indicate that selection is acting to maintain similar frequencies between populations at the colour locus. Using mark recapture techniques we found that mating success is not dependent on female coloration. We tested the mimicry hypothesis by presenting live and dead models to males. Dead models were highly attractive irrespective of coloration. In contrast, with live models males could not distinguish between androchromes and other males, and were more attracted to gynochrome females. Despite this, within populations morph frequencies remained constant over time and mating was at random with respect to female coloration. However, there was a positive relationship between male density and androchrome frequency in a comparative study of eight populations. We discuss our results in the framework of sexual conflict theory and suggest that andro- and gynochrome females are using different strategies to control their number of matings. The different morphs might be maintained in a balanced polymorphism by a combination of density- and frequency-dependent mechanisms. (C) 2002 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd on behalf of The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available