ebook img

An experimental study of the refusal display in the damselfly Platycnemis pennipes (Pall.) (Zygoptera: Platycnemididae) PDF

9 Pages·1992·2.1 MB·English
by  GorbS
Save to my drive
Quick download
Download
Most books are stored in the elastic cloud where traffic is expensive. For this reason, we have a limit on daily download.

Preview An experimental study of the refusal display in the damselfly Platycnemis pennipes (Pall.) (Zygoptera: Platycnemididae)

Odonalologica21(3): 299-307 September1. 1992 An experimental study of the refusal display in the damselfly Platycnemispennipes(Pall.) (Zygoptera: Platycnemididae) S. Gorb DepartmentofInsect Physiology, SchmalhausenInstituteofZoology, Ukrainian AcademyofSciences, Lenin Street 15, UKR-252601 Kiev, Ukraine ReceivedNovember 1, 1991 /Revisedand AcceptedJanuary24, 1992 Femalesintandemorhavingbeenintandem,singlefemales layingeggsandjuvenile females can demonstrate refusal display to conspecific males and those ofcertain closelyrelated spp.Refusaldisplayhassomesuccessive statesdependingonthemale’s persistence.Theresponses ofP.pennipesmalestotherefusal displayby femaleswere studied by meansof 11 models.These differed in thepresence and position ofthe abdomen. Female models with abdomens thatrise atanglesof45" and 90" obtained thelargestnumber ofnegativereactions.Atanextreme state ofrefusal display(abdo- men rises to maximal angle) the number ofpositive reactions by a male rose, but seizure ofthe female in tandem washampered.Males demonstrate athreat display that is similar to female refusal display. In the natural environment threat display probablydecreases the frequencyofhomosexual contacts, whereasrefusal displayof females leads toaneconomy ofmaletimeand energy. INTRODUCTION Communicationof Odonata images is characterizedby a varietyofkey visual stimuli.They canbe dividedintotwo alternativegroups;oneofpositive reactions ofindividuals(attracting)and anotherofnegative reactions (repelling). Thefirst group ofstimuli takes part in the recognition of sexual partners, for marking places of oviposition (MARTENS, 1989) and in roosting. The second group serves for giving signals indicating occupied territory, refusal to pair etc. Such stimuli canbe purely morphological [i.e. thegeneral body position (UBUKATA, 1983]or thecolorationofabdomenandwings (FRANTSEVICH& MOKRUSH- OV, 1984)orbehavioural[e.g. wing clapping ofCalopterygidae (B1CK& B1CK, 1978]. The majority of Zygoptera (BUCHHOLTZ. 1956; PAJUNEN, 1963; 300 S. Gorb UTZERI, 1988)and some Libellulidae(PAJUNEN, 1964;ROBBEY, 1975)hold theabdomenelevatedwhileperching.Thisposition isobservedamong individuals ofboth sexes. Forthe femaleitis a display ofrefusal to pair (UTZERI, 1988). This is welldemonstratedbyfemales,especially juvenile ones, whenconspecific individualsand/orindividualsofclosely relatedspecies appear.The sameoccurs infemalesresting afteroviposition, incoldindividualsin theearly morning and infemales intandem.Theresponseofintruding malestotherefusal display can bedifferent(ranging fromapairing attempttoanescape or attack). SomeLepido- pteraandColeoptera haveacomparable refusal display intheirsexual behaviour (males andfemales ofthe butterfly Thymelicus lineola (Hesperidae) (PIVNIK & McNEIL, 1985),femalesofthe ladybird beetleHarmoniaaxyridis (OBATA, 1988).Experimental studiesofkey visual stimuli, that exciterefusal display for pairing in Pieris rapae crucivora (Lepidoptera, Pieridae) femaleswere carried out by OBARA (1984). A similar investigation of the release of attack by a territorial male Sympetrum was carried out by FRANTSEVICH & MOKRU- SHOV (1984). MATERIALANDMETHODS Field observations andexperimentswerecarriedoutatthe VorsklaRivernearthe villageNizhnije Mliny(5 kmfromPoltavaCity)insummer1990. Observationswererecorded inafieldjournaland onfilm. EXPERIMENTSWITH MODELS. — Freshlykilled specimenswerepenetratedby a straw that passed into the thoraxand abdomen and wasfixed toaholder(BUCHHOLTZ, 1956).The following 11 variantsofmodelsweremade(themodels areshownwiththehistogramsinFigs7-17);(1)intact 2, straightabdomen(0°); - (2) 9,threelast abdomensegmentscurved atanangleof45°; — (3) 2,caudal halfofabdomen curvedatanangleof45°; - (4) 2, abdomencurvedatanangleof45°; — (5) 2, abdomen curved at anangleof90°; — (6) 2, abdomen thrown back overthorax at an angleof135°; - (7) 2,without abdomen; - (8) 2,abdomenturned downatanangleof45°; — (9)intact 6, abdomen straight(0°); - (10) S,caudal halfofabdomencurved atanangleof45°; - (11) 6, abdomen curved atanangleof45°. Wingsofmodels wereintact. Preparedmodels wereused duringno morethan1-2days(theywerekeptin arefrigeratorbecause they driedand lost their natural colouration overa longerperiod ofuse). Models were shown to malesperchednotmorethan 1.5mfromtheedgeofthewater. Observationswerecarriedoutbetween 11.00 and 16,00 h. Such males await females attheperches and thus they demonstrate highsexual activity. Modelswere presentedinonewayonly (inprofile),becausea ’’facetoface” presentation usuallyevokedanaggressivereaction(attack,escape).After10-15presentationsmodelswerechanged. Due tothis, temporalchanges in maleactivity had only aslightinfluence upon therelationshipsof the various responses. This thesiswascheckedby summingall the male responses recorded forfive days at a particulartime interval.The mean male responses were then compared forevery time period.Every model wasshown toevery maleonly once.Registrationwascarriedoutaccordingto FRANTSEVICH & MOKRUSHOV (1984).Behavioural male responses were registeredasoneof five reactions: (1) tandem(t): 6 settlesuponthe modeland seizesitsprothoraxwith theanalappendages; (2) survey (s): <J flies around the model and settles upon it withoutattemptingtopair; (3) indifference (i): 6 continues toperch, sometimes demonstratinga threatdisplay; (4) escape (e); 6 rapidly movesto anotherperch,usually inanoppositedirection fromthe model; Refusal display inPlatycnemispennipes 301 (5) attack(a): S suddenlyrushes atthe model,usually ’’face toface”. Altogether 1415reactions (an average of 130belongingtoeach model)wereregistered. Inseparate experimentsmodels Nos 9, 10,II wereshowntoperchingfemales. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION FEMALE REFUSAL DISPLAY At the bank of the river single females and females in tandem were often exposed toassaults by conspecific malesandby coenagrionid males (Coenagrion puella, C.pulchellum, Erythromma viridulum). Juvenilefemalesusually fell into thegrassin thesecases. Juvenilefemales, females that hadbeefi intandem,and singlefemales during oviposition (Fig. 1)demonstratedrefusal display.Platycne- mispennipes hasanextreme variantofthis behaviour(as shown by the work of BUCHHOLTZ (1956)), and there are somediscretevari- ants that the femaledemon- strates depending on male persistance and the distance betweenthem(Figs 2-5): (a) perching female curves up last 2-3 abdomen segments (Fig. 3); — (b) femaleraises theabdomenup to anangle of 45°, slightly moves the wings apart and with jerky Figs 1-5. Platycnemis pennipes (Pall.) movements,foldsandopens differentsuccessive conditions offemale refusal display:(I)intandem; — (2)per- them(Fig. 4); - (c) female ching,straightabdomen; — (3) curving throws the abdomen back up last 2-3 abdominal segments; - (4) overthethorax,risingon the femaleraisesabdomenatbaseatanangle hind legs (Fig. 5). of45°,slightly moves wings apart and Refusal display canbe de- with the helpofjerky movements folds monstratedbythefemaledu- and opens them; — (5)throwingback abdomenoverthorax,raisingonherhind ringtheflight.She curves up legs. the abdomen and performs jerky movements up and down(Fig. 6). Females demonstratedre- fusal displays when male modelsapproached from the 302 S. Gorb front or fromone side. The display was espe- cially vigorous when the models were placed 3-4 cm above her. We did not observe any escapereaction.Thefemaleresponds by raising theabdomenandspreading herwings. Thedu- ration ofpresentation of the male model did not change the femaleposition. Tactilecontact intensifiedtheeffect ofvisual stimuli. The fe- maleraisedthe abdomen vertically andthrew itforwardsover thethoraxonly in responseto tactile contact with the model. Sometimes in this case the female demonstratedescape and refusal display together. Females do not react ifmale models are presented from behind. Fig.6. Platycnemispennipes(Pall.): femaledemonstratingrefusal display in flight. MALETHREATDISPLAY Wing movements by Zygoptera femalesand males in refusal/threat display were observed by UTZERI (1988). He supposed thatthis behaviouroffemales comes from intraspecific imitationofaggressive males by the females. Males demonstrate such behaviour as a threat display towards other males, or as a response to females’refusal display. Malescan also demonstratethreatdisplay by abdomenmovements. Todesignatetheaggressive behaviourofmales, UTZERI proposed theterm: ’’threat display”and for suchbehaviour in femalestheterm ’’refusal display”. We use these terms inthis paper. Malesthatperch neartheriverreact by attack totheapproach ofother males. Afterthis they perform the ’’face to face” behaviour.Then, ifthe intruderflies away, the resident persues him usually fora distanceof 10-15 cm, after which hereturnstotheperch or toaplace not farfromit(3-15cm). Sometimesperching males demonstrate a behaviour that corresponds to female refusal display. It occurs when the intruderattempts topair withthe resident. This maytake place in themorning and in theevening whenthe sexualactivity ofsome individuals is lower.During the daytime homosexualattemptsare ratherrare, but inexperi- ments with modelsthey are seen more frequently. This can possibly be due to the fact thatmalemodelscorrespond tomalesonly inoutwardappearance.Model immobility, the showing ofany modelin profile and the absence ofaggressive behaviour reduced the attack reaction of a resident (Figs 15-17) and led to indifferencereactions. In this case we did not distinguish such a reaction from refusal display. Refusal display in Platycnemispennipes 303 Figs 7-12. For caption seeFigs 13-17. 304 S.Gorb Figs 13-17. Platycnemispennipes(Pall.): malereactions tomodelsofdifferentposi- tionsoffemale/male (greybars) in com- parison with reaction to model No. I (black bars). — [Reactions: T: tandem; — S; survey; — I: indifference; - E; escape; - A: attack). Refusal displayinPlalyenemispennipes 305 Some malescan fly 10-20m along the edge of the water duringtheirtimeof maximum activity (12.00-15.00 h.), often with nick elevated abdomens. Such flights are also performed by females from broken tandems (the same refusal display). In thisway theindividualindicatesto the surrounding malesherrepeal oftandemformation. MALE REACTIONSTO DIFFERENTPOSITIONS OFFEMALE Resultsofexperiments with femalemodels are presented inhistograms (Figs 7-14). From model I to model6 the percentage ofpositive reactions (tandem, survey) decreaseswhilethepercentageofnegative reactions(indifference,escape. attack) rises (Fig. 18).Mo- dels5 and6were themost effective forcausing nega- tive reactions of males. Females without an ab- domen(7) and withanab- domen turned down (8) evokedreactionsthatdiffe- red slightly from those to intactmodels(only by per- centage of indifference). After vertically raising the female abdomen and cur- lingit,theproportionofpo- sitive reactions rises. This position hampers the ac- cess ofthe maleto the fe- maleandtandemformation is difficult. In this case malesdo as follows: fly to the model from behind, seize the thorax with the legs and try to seize the prothorax withthe analap- pendages. Such attempts are usually unsuccessful, whereas attempts to seize thethoraxofafemalefrom thefrontsometimesleadto Fig. 18. Platycnemispennipes (Pall.): dependenceof male responses onabdomen angles offemale models. In row of success. Due to this, this models Nos 1-6 abdomen angles increase. - (Reactions:T: model(6) hasacomparati- tandem; — S; survey: — I:indifference; — E: escape]. 306 S. Gorb vely highpercentageofsurvey reactions. Seizurefromone side (fromabove the prothorax) led to tandem in more cases. More persistent males had success in this femaleposition also. MALE REACTIONS TO DIFFERENTPOSITIONSOFMALE Only 3 models (9, 10, 11) were used in this experiment. In the lineofthese models we can also see some displacement to negative reactions (Figs 15-17). A highpercentageofhomosexualcontacts intheexperiment doesnot correspond tothesituationin naturewherethey arerare, becausetherearekey visual stimuli connected with behaviour that serve for male recognition. When the resident fliesfromtheperch, theintruderdemonstratesitsaggressive behaviourby rushing atthe resident flying athim ’’face to face”. Ifthis doesnot happen, theresident maymistake the individualfor a female.We often saw this in our experiments. Threat displays, between resident and intruder males result in a considerable lowering ofhomosexualcontacts in P. pennipes. CONCLUSION Therefusal display is adynamical behavioural act. Itisevokedby akey visual stimulus — appearanceofconspecific and coenagrionid males, that display to the resident one of two reactions; attack or attempt to pair. Experiments with models cannot reflect the whole spectrum of communicative possibilities of refusal display because in species with littlesexual dimorphism (Coenagrion, Ischnura elegans, P. pennipes) the recognition ofa female is connected more withreciprocal behaviouralreactionsofbothsexesthan withmorphological signs. Malesdonot react orreact only slightly when femalesdisplay refusalbecause they are not ready forpairing. As these females are in a zone of many active mature males, theirbehavioureconomises maletime andenergy. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS My sincere thanks are due to Professor Dr L.l. FRANTSEVICH for critical comments onthe manuscript. 1thank E. GORB and Dr V.TITARfortheirassistance inthe translation. REFERENCES BICK, G.H.& J.C. BICK, 1978. The significance ofwingclappingin Zygoptera. Odonatologica 7(1): 5-9. BUCHHOLTZ, C., 1956. EineAnalyse des Paarungsverhaltensund der dabei wirkenden Auslöser bei den Libellen PlatycnemispennipesPall, undPlatycnemisdealbataKlug. Z.Tierpsychol. 13: 13-25. FRANTSEVICH, L.L & PA. MOKRUSHOV, 1984. Visual stimulireleasing attack ofaterritorial Refusal display in Plalycnemispennipes 307 male inSympetrum(Anisoptera:Libellulidae). Odonatologica 13(3): 335-350. MARTENS,A., 1989. Aggregationoftandems inCoenagrionpulchellum(Vander Linden, 1825) duringoviposition (Odonata, Coenagrionidae).Zool. Anz. 223(1/2): 124-128. OBARA.Y., 1984.Key stimuli elicitingthematerefusal posture inthematedfemaleofthe cabbage white butterfly,Pieris rapae crucivora. Proc. Jpn.Acad. (B)60(5): 145-148. OBATA, S., 1988. Matingrefusal and itssignificancein females ofthe ladybird beetle, Harmonia axyridis. Physiol.Em. 13(2); 193-199. PAJUNEN,V.I., 1963.Onthe threatdisplayofresting dragonflies(Odonata).Suomenhydnl.Aikak. 29(4): 236-239. PAJUNEN,V.I.,1964.AggressivebehaviourinLeucorrhiniacaudalisCharp.(Odonata,Libellulidae). Annls.zool.fenn. 1(4): 357-369. PIVNICK,K.A. & J.N. McNEIL, 1985. Matelocationandmatingbehaviour ofThymelicuslineola (Lepidoptera,Hesperidae).Ann. ent.Soc.Am. 78(5):651-656. ROBBEY, C.W., 1975. Observationsonbreeding behaviour ofPachydiplax longipennis(Odonata. Libellulidae). Psyche82(1): 89-96. UBUKATA,H., 1983. Anexperimentalstudy ofsexrecognitionin Cordulia aeneaamurensisSelys (Anisoptera:Corduliidae).Odonatologica 12(1):71-81. UTZERI,C., 1988.Female "refusal display"versusmale "threat display"in Zygoptera:is itacase ofintraspecific imitation? Odonatologica 17(1):45-54.

See more

The list of books you might like

Most books are stored in the elastic cloud where traffic is expensive. For this reason, we have a limit on daily download.