4.5 Article

Female grouping best predicts lekking in blackbuck (Antilope cervicapra)

期刊

BEHAVIORAL ECOLOGY AND SOCIOBIOLOGY
卷 57, 期 3, 页码 283-294

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00265-004-0844-z

关键词

lekking; mating system; intraspecific variation; blackbuck

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study of intraspecific variation can provide insights into the evolution and maintenance of behavior. To evaluate the relative importance of ecological, demographic and social conditions thought to favor lekking, I studied variation in mating behavior among and within populations of the blackbuck, Antilope cervicapra, an Indian antelope. Rather than viewing lekking as a discrete mating strategy, I took a continuous approach and treated lekking as a question of the clustering of mating territories, with leks representing one extreme in a range of territory distributions. I surveyed nine blackbuck populations, which differed in population density and in habitat conditions. For each population, I described the mating system in terms of the clustering of mating territories, and measured various factors suggested to favor lekking. I found that large-scale, among-population variation in territory clustering was most strongly related to female group size. Territory clustering was not related to population density. Female group size, in turn, was best explained by habitat structure. Interestingly, these among-population patterns were repeated at a finer spatial scale within one intensively studied population. These findings suggest that territorial males respond to local patterns in female distribution (represented by group size) when making decisions regarding territory location. Finally, although female distribution may explain territory clustering at the population level and more locally within a population, other selective factors (e.g., female preference, male competition, male harassment) are likely to shape the clustering and size of territories at even finer scales.

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