4.2 Article

Mating tactics and mate choice in relation to age and social rank in male mountain goats

期刊

JOURNAL OF MAMMALOGY
卷 89, 期 3, 页码 626-635

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1644/07-MAMM-A-234R.1

关键词

alternative mating tactics; dominance; mate choice; mountain goat; Oreamnos americanus

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In polygynous mammals, mating success of males often depends on intense male-male competition and the use of alternative mating tactics. Because reproduction incurs substantial energetic costs and risks of fight injuries, mate selection by males should be expected, particularly when females vary in their ability to produce offspring but can only be defended 1 at a time. Here, we investigated during 3 ruts how age and social rank of male mountain goats (Oreamnos americanus) affected the formation of consort pairs with females (tending tactic) in a marked population at Caw Ridge, Alberta, Canada. Among consort pairs, we quantified the behaviors of males and females, and the use of an alternative mating tactic by competing males, coursing, which consists of disrupting the pair to gain temporarily access to the female, often by pursuing her. Mate choice was assessed by testing if old and dominant males observed in consort pairs tended experienced females more often than younger females, because reproductive success of females increases with age. Males in consort pairs were >= 4 years old and most (86%, n = 59) were in the top one-half of the dominance hierarchy. Age and social rank of males were positively related to age of females and the total number of young produced by the tended female. All observed matings (n = 32) occurred between 14 November and 2 December and 91 % were between males and females in consort pairs. Subordinate males gained mating access to females through coursing, but this tactic was rare. Our study provides evidences of mate choice by males for experienced females in an ungulate and the 1st quantitative information on the rut of mountain goats.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据