4.5 Article

Evaluating the costs of a sexually selected weapon: big horns at a small price

期刊

ANIMAL BEHAVIOUR
卷 86, 期 5, 页码 977-985

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2013.08.017

关键词

cost; horn; male-male competition; rhinoceros beetle; sexual selection; Trypoxylus dichotomus

资金

  1. Ford Foundation
  2. National Science Foundation [DGE-0809127]
  3. Direct For Biological Sciences
  4. Division Of Integrative Organismal Systems [0919781] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  5. Division Of Integrative Organismal Systems
  6. Direct For Biological Sciences [1310235] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A major assumption of sexual selection theory is that ornaments and weapons are costly. Such costs should maintain the reliability of ornaments and weapons as indicators of male quality, and therefore explain why choosy females and rival males pay attention to these traits. However, honest signalling may not depend on costs if the penalty for cheating is sufficiently high, a situation that is likely to be true for most weapons because they are frequently tested during combat. We examined and summarized the costs of producing and carrying giant horns in the rhinoceros beetle, Trypoxylus dichotomus. Remarkably, we found no evidence for fitness costs. Previously we found that horns do not impair flight performance, and here we found that horns did not stunt the growth of other body structures or weaken the beetles' immune response. Finally, and most importantly, horns did not reduce male survival in the field. Collectively, our results provide strong evidence that the exaggerated horns of T. dichotomus are surprisingly inexpensive. We discuss why weapons may be inherently less costly than ornaments, and suggest that the lack of fitness costs offers a simple, yet unexpected, explanation for why rhinoceros beetle horns are both elaborate and diverse. (C) 2013 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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