Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2pzkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-07T01:31:33.070Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Size-dependent seasonal activity for males of the dung beetle Copris acutidens (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 August 2019

Mayumi Akamine
Mayumi Akamine*
Affiliation:
Department of Science and Engineering, Center for Biomedical Engineering Research, Toyo University, 2500 Kujirai, Kawagoe City, Saitama, 350-0815, Japan College of Agriculture, Ibaraki University, 3-21-1 Tyuo Amimachi Inashiki-gun, Ibaraki, 300-0393, Japan
*
Corresponding author (e-mail: akamayum@gmail.com)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study aimed to determine differences in activities between two male morphs of the dung beetle Copris acutidens Motschulsky (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) during the reproductive period and to examine the size distribution of reproductive males that stayed in nests. The activities of two male morphs distinguished by a threshold value of body size were compared with those by horn length. Regardless of body size or horn length, earlier activity of minor males was observed during the reproductive period. The sex ratio showed the greatest female bias when minor males were the more abundant than major males, indicating that minor males were the most active when competition was the weakest and these could avoid direct combat with major males. In morphs distinguished by horn length, more major males than minor males stayed in nests with females although the major males became the most active from the middle of the reproductive period. Thus, longer horns may directly confer a competitive advantage to males, enabling them to stay in nests with females, whereas early activity of minor males does not always indicate the effect of horn length directly. Therefore, this behaviour may occur regardless of whether the morphs differ in body size or horn length.

Type
Behaviour and Ecology
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 151 , Issue 6 , December 2019 , pp. 757 - 767
Copyright
© Entomological Society of Canada 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Subject editor: Kevin Floate

References

Akamine, M. 2016a. Dimorphism of both head and prothoracic horn morphologies in male Copris acutidens (Coleoptera, Scarabaeoidea). Entomological Science, 19: 82–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Akamine, M. 2016b. Size- and context-dependent nest-staying behaviour of males of the Japanese dung beetle, Copris acutidens (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae). European Journal of Entomology, 113: 207–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Akamine, M. and Sato, H. 2011a. Niche segregation among three large dung beetles (Scarabaeidae). Japanese Journal of Entomology New Series, 14: 290–296 [In Japanese with english abstract].Google Scholar
Akamine, M. and Sato, H. 2011b. Nesting behavior in Copris acutidens, the role of males. Saikaku Tshûshin, 22: 9–11. [In Japanese].Google Scholar
Chamorro-Florescano, I.V. and Favila, M.E. 2009. The reproductive status of both sexes affects the frequency of mating and the reproductive success of males in the ball roller beetle Canthon cyanellus cyanellus (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae). Behaviour, 146: 1499–1512.Google Scholar
Cook, D.F. 1988. Sexual selection in dung beetles. II. Female fecundity as an estimate of male reproductive success in relation to horn size, and alternative reproductive strategies in Onthophagus binodis (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae). Australian Journal of Zoology, 36: 521–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dewsbury, D.A. 1982. Ejaculate cost and male choice. American Naturalist, 119: 601–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eberhard, W.G. 1979 . The function of horns in Podischnus agenor (Dynastinae) and other beetles. In Sexual selection and reproductive competition in insects. Edited by Blum, M.S. and Blum, N.A.. Academic Press, London, United Kingdom. Pp. 231–258.Google Scholar
Eberhard, W.G. 1982. Beetle horn dimorphism: making the best of a bad lot. American Naturalist, 119: 420–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eberhard, W.G. and Gutiérrez, E.E. 1991. Male dimorphisms in beetles and earwigs and the question of developmental constraints. Evolution, 45: 18–28.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Emlen, D.J. 1994. Environmental control of horn length dimorphism in the beetle Onthophagus acuminatus (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae). Proceedings of The Royal Society of London B, 256: 131–136.Google Scholar
Emlen, D.J. and Nijhout, H.F. 2000. The development and evolution of exaggerated morphologies in insects. Annual Review of Entomology, 45: 661–708.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Emlen, S.T., and Oring, L.W. 1977. Ecology, sexual selection, and the evolution of mating system. Science, 197: 215–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Favila, M.E., Nolasco, J., Chamorro-Florescano, I., and Equihua, M. 2005. Sperm competition and evidence of sperm fertilization patterns in the carrion ball-roller beetle Canthon cyanellus cyanellus LeConte (Scarabaeidae: Scarabaeinae). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 59: 38–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gross, M.R. 1996. Alternative reproductive strategies and tactics: diversity within sexes. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 11: 92–98.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Halffter, G. 1997. Sobsocial behavior in Scarabaeinae beetles. In The evolution of social behavior in insects and Arachnids. Edited by Choe, J.C. and Crespi, B.J.. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom. Pp. 237–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halffter, G. and Edmonds, W.D. 1982. The nesting behavior of dung beetles (Scarabaeidae): an ecological and evolutive approach. Institute de Ecologia, Mexico City, Mexico.Google Scholar
Halffter, G., Huerta, C., and López-Portillo, J. 1996. Parental care and offspring survival in Copris incertus Say, a subsocial beetle. Animal Behavior, 52: 133–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hardersen, S.M., Macagno, A.L.M., Sacchi, R., and Toni, I. 2011. Seasonal constraints on the mandible allometry of Lucanus cervus (Coleoptera: Lucanidae). European Journal of Entomology, 108: 461–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huerta, C., Anduaga, S., López-Portillo, J., and Halffter, G. 2010. Use of food and space by tunneler dung beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeinae) during reproduction, Community and Ecosystem Ecology, 39: 1165–1169.Google Scholar
Hunt, J. and Simmons, L.W. 1998. Patterns of parental provisioning covary with male morphology in a horned beetles (Onthophagus taurus) (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 42: 447–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Imamori, M. 1985. Dung beetle; secret of chamber. Heibonsya, Tokyo, Japan.Google Scholar
Kerman, K., Roggero, A., Rolando, A., and Claudia, P. 2018 Evidence for male horn dimorphism and related pronotal shape variation in Copris lunaris (Linnaeus, 1758) (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae, Coprini). Insects, 9: 1–13, article 108. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects9030108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klemperer, H.G. 1983. The evolution of parental behaviour in Scarabaeinae (Coleoptera, Scarabaeidae): an experimental approach. Ecological Entomology, 8: 49–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kotiaho, J.S. and Tomkins, J.L. 2001. The discrimination of alternative male morphologies. Behavioral Ecology, 12: 553–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kvarnemo, C. and Ahnesjö, I. 1996. The dynamics of operational sex ratios and competition for mates. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 11: 404–408.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mizuta, K. 1959. The nests of dung beetles. In Life histories of Japanese insects, volume 4, beetles. Edited by Iwata, K., Furukawa, H., and Yasumatu, K.. Kodansya, Tokyo, Japan. Pp. 297–316. [In Japanese].Google Scholar
Nakatsuru, K. and Kramer, D.L. 1982. Is sperm cheap? Limited male fertility and female choice in the lemon tetra (Pisces, Characidae). Science, 216: 753–755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nomura, H. 1998. Dung beetles in Nara Park. Nejirebane, 78: 1–15.Google Scholar
Otani, T. 1987. Commentary on insects observed by Fabre and found in Japan. In Photos Souvenirs Entomologiques 5. Edited by Mitani, H. and Imamori, M.. Iwasaki Shoten, Tokyo, Japan. Pp. 41–47. [In Japanese].Google Scholar
Parker, G. 1990. Sperm competition games: sneaks and extra-pair copulations. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 242: 127–133.Google Scholar
Pizzo, A., Citeroni, V., Mazzone, F., Dellacasa, M., and Palestrini, C. 2015. Are horn morphological patterns able to differentiate the two closely related species Copris klugi Harold and Copris sierrensis Matthews? Neotropical Entomology, 44: 153–159.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
R Development Core Team 2018. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Available from www.R-project.org [accessed 22 July 2019].Google Scholar
Rasmussen, J.L. 1994. The influence of horn and body size on the reproductive behavior of the horned rainbow scarab beetle Phanaeus difformis (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae). Journal of Insect Behavior, 7: 67–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shafiei, M., Moczeck, A.P., and Nijhout, H.F. 2001. Food availability controls the onset of metamorphosis in the dung beetle Onthophagus taurus (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae). Physiological Entomology, 26: 173–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simmons, L.W. 2014. Sperm competition. In The evolution of insect mating system. Edited by Shuker, D.M. and Simmons, L.W.. Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom. Pp. 181–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simmons, L.W. and Emlen, D.J. 2006. Evolutionary trade-off between weapons and testes. Proceedings of the National Academy Science of the United States of America, 103: 16346–16351.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Simmons, L.W., Emlen, D.J., and Tomkins, J.L. 2007. Sperm competition games between sneaks and guards: a comparative analysis using dimorphic male beetles. Evolution, 61: 2684–2692.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Simmons, L.W. and Kotiaho, J.S., 2002. Evolution of ejaculates: patterns of phenotypic and genotypic variation and condition dependence in sperm competition traits. Evolution, 56: 1622–1631.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Simmons, J.L. and Siva-Jothy, M.T. 1998. Sperm competition in insects: mechanisms and the potential for selection. In Sperm competition and sexual selection. Edited by Moller, A.P. and Birkhead, T.R.. Academic Press, San Diego, California, United States of America. Pp. 341–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simmons, J.L., Tomkins, J.L., and Hunt, J. 1999. Sperm competition games played by dimorphic male beetles. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 266: 145–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siva-Jothy, M.T. 1987. Mate securing tactics and the cost of fighting in the Japanese horned beetle Allomyrina dichotoma. Journal of Ethology, 5: 165–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sugiura, S., Yamaura, Y., and Makihara, H. 2007. Sexual and male horn dimorphism in Copris ochus (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae). Zoological Science, 24: 1082–1085.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tatsuzawa, S., Fujita, K., and Ito, M., 2002. Population dynamics of sika deer Cervus nippon on the flat part of the Nara Park. Bulletin Kansai Organization. Nature Conservation, 24: 3–14.Google Scholar
Tyndale-Biscoe, M. 1984. Adaptive significant of brood care of Copris diversus Waterhouse (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae). Bulletin of Entomological Research, 74: 453–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wedell, N., Gage, M.J.G., and Parker, G.A. 2002. Sperm competition, male prudence and sperm-limited females. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 17: 313–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weir, L.K., Grant, J.W.A., and Hutchings, J.A. 2011. The influence of operational sex ratio on the intensity of competition for mates. American Naturalist, 177: 167–176.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yamane, T., Okada, K., Nakayama, S., and Miyatake, T. 2010. Dispersal and ejaculatory strategies associated with exaggeration of weapon in an armed beetle. Proceedings Royal Society B, 277: 1705–1710.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Akamine supplementary material

Figures S1-S4

Download Akamine supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 12.4 MB