Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-669899f699-b58lm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-30T15:39:01.587Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

4 - Modeling alternative mating tactics as dynamic games

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 August 2009

By
Jeffrey R. Lucas  and
Richard D. Howard
Edited by
Rui F. Oliveira ,
Michael Taborsky  and
H. Jane Brockmann
Jeffrey R. Lucas
Affiliation:
Dept of Biological Sciences Purdue University West Lafayette, IN 47907 USA
Richard D. Howard
Affiliation:
Dept of Biological Sciences Purdue University West Lafayette, IN 47907 USA
Rui F. Oliveira
Affiliation:
Instituto Superior Psicologia Aplicada, Lisbon
Michael Taborsky
Affiliation:
Universität Bern, Switzerland
H. Jane Brockmann
Affiliation:
University of Florida
Get access

Summary

CHAPTER SUMMARY

Alternative reproductive tactics may result from various causal mechanisms. This is relevant for the theoretician because the mathematical approach used to address the evolution of alternative mating tactics will be affected by the causal basis of the differential expression of these behavior patterns between (and within) individuals. In this chapter, we restrict our focus to alternative male mating tactics that are strictly controlled by short-term behavioral decisions. Based on a variation of the Lucas and Howard (1995) dynamic game-theory model, we show that a detailed understanding of five properties of a system with alternative reproductive tactics is important in understanding the evolutionary trade-offs associated with the choice among alternative mating tactics. These properties include (1) physiological or morphological state and how state is affected by the tactic chosen, (2) environmental conditions, (3) frequency- and (4) density-dependent attributes of the pay-offs derived from each tactic, and (5) time constraints that either directly affect the expression of a mating tactic or affect the pay-offs derived from those tactics. These five properties should be considered simultaneously, and we demonstrate how this can be done within the framework of a dynamic game. The model is extended to consider the evolution of graded signals. Our model suggests that the prediction of Proulx et al. (2002) that older males should have more honest signals is sensitive to assumptions made about environmental conditions and time constraints on future success. We end with a discussion of the level of detail that should be built into models.

Type
Chapter
Information
Alternative Reproductive Tactics
An Integrative Approach
 , pp. 63 - 82
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2008

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.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Alonzo, S. H. and Warner, R. R. 2000a. Allocation to mate guarding or increased sperm production in a Mediterranean wrasse. American Naturalist 156, 266–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alonzo, S. H. and Warner, R. R. 2000b. Dynamic games and field experiments examining intra- and intersexual conflict: explaining counterintuitive mating behavior in a Mediterranean wrasse, Symphodus ocellatus. Behavioral Ecology 11, 56–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alonzo, S. H. and Warner, R. R. 2000c. Female choice, conflict between the sexes and the evolution of male alternative reproductive behaviors. Evolutionary Ecology Research 2, 149–170.Google Scholar
Arak, A. 1988. Callers and satellites in the natterjack toad: evolutionarily stable decision rules. Animal Behaviour 36, 416–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bevier, C. R. 1997. Utilization of energy substrates during calling activity in tropical frogs. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 41, 343–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyko, A. R., Gibson, R. M., and Lucas, J. R. 2004. How predation risk affects the temporal dynamics of avian leks: greater sage grouse vs. golden eagles. American Naturalist 163, 154–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brodin, A. 2000. Why do hoarding birds gain fat in winter the wrong way? Suggestions from a dynamic model. Behavioral Ecology 11, 27–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caldwell, J. P. 1987. Demography and life history of two species of chorus frogs (Anura: Hylidae) in South Carolina. Copeia, 114–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Charnov, E. L. 1993. Life History Invariants: Some Explanations of Symmetry in Evolutionary Ecology. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cherry, M. I. 1993. Sexual selection in the raucous toad, Bufo rangeri. Animal Behaviour 45, 359–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, C. W. 1994. Antipredator behavior and the asset-protection principle. Behavioral Ecology 5, 159–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, C. W. and Mangel, M. 2000. Dynamic State Variable Models in Ecology: Methods and Applications. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Clarke, R. D. 1977. Postmetamorphic survivorship of Fowler's toad, Bufo woodhousei fowleri. Copeia, 594–597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawkins, R. 1980. Good strategy or evolutionary stable strategy? In Barlow, G. W. and Silverberg, J. (eds.) Sociobiology: Beyond Nature/Nurture?, pp. 331–367. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Dugatkin, L. A. and Reeve, H. K. 1998. Game Theory and Animal Behavior. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dyson, M. L., Passmore, N. I., Bishop, P. J., and Henzi, S. P. 1992. Male behavior and correlates of mating success in a natural population of African painted reed frogs (Hyperolius marmoratus). Herpetologica 48, 236–246.Google Scholar
Fleming, I. A. and Reynolds, J. D. 2004. Salmonid breeding systems. In Hendry, A. P. and Stearns, S. C. (eds.) Evolution Illuminated: Salmon and Their Relatives, pp. 264–294. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fraizer, T. 1997. A dynamic model of mating behavior in digger wasps: the energetics of male–male competition mimic size-dependent thermal constraints. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 41, 423–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garant, D., Fontaine, P. -M., Good, S. P., Dodson, J. J., and Bernatchez, L. 2002. The influence of male parental identity on growth and survival of offspring in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar). Evolutionary Ecology Research 4, 537–549.Google Scholar
Gerhardt, H. C. and Huber, F. 2002. Acoustic Communication in Insects and Anurans. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Gintis, H., Smith, E. H., and Bowles, S. 2001. Costly signalling and cooperation. Journal of Theoretical Biology 213, 103–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Given, M. F. 2002. Interrelationships among calling effort, growth rate, and chorus tenure in Bufo fowleri. Copeia, 979–987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grafe, T. U., Schmuck, R., and Linsemair, K. E. 1992. Reproductive energetics of the African reed frogs, Hyperolius viridiflavus and Hyperolius marmoratus. Physiological Zoology 65, 153–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grafen, A. 1984. Natural selection, kin selection and group selection. In Krebs, J. R. and Davies, N. B. (eds.) Behavioural Ecology: An Evolutionary Approach, pp. 62–84. Oxford, UK:Blackwell Scientific.Google Scholar
Grafen, A. 1990. Biological signals as handicaps. Journal of Theoretical Biology 144, 517–546.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Green, A. J. 1990. Determinants of chorus participation and the effects of size, weight and competition on advertisement calling in the tungara frog, Physalemus pustulosus (Leptodactylidae). Animal Behaviour 39, 620–638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gross, M. R. 1984. Sunfish, salmon, and the evolution of alternative reproductive strategies and tactics in fishes. In Potts, G. and Wooton, R. J. (eds.) Fish Reproduction: Strategies and Tactics in Fishes, pp. 55–75. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Gross, M. R. 1985. Alternative breeding strategies in male salmon. Nature 313, 47–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gross, M. R. 1996. Alternative reproductive strategies and tactics: diversity within sexes. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 11, 92–98.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gross, M. R. and Repka, J. 1998. Stability with inheritance in the conditional strategy. Journal of Theoretical Biology 192, 445–453.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Halliday, T. R. and Verrell, P. A. 1988. Body size and age in amphibians and reptiles. Journal of Herpetology 22, 253–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamilton, I. M. and Dill, L. M. 2002. Three-player social parasitism games: implications for resource defense and group formation. American Naturalist 159, 670–686.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harris, W. E. and Lucas, J. R. 2002. A state-based model of sperm allocation in a group-breeding salamander. Behavioral Ecology 13, 705–712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hilborn, R. and Mangel, M. 1997. The Ecological Detective: Confronting Models with Data. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Houston, A. I. and McNamara, J. M. 1987. Singing to attract a mate: a stochastic dynamic game. Journal of Theoretical Biology 129, 57–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houston, A. I. and McNamara, J. M. 1988. Fighting for food: a dynamic version of the hawk–dove game. Evolutionary Ecology 2, 51–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houston, A. I. and McNamara, J. M. 1999. Models of Adaptive Behaviour. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Howard, R. D. 1978. The evolution of mating strategies in bullfrogs, Rana catesbeiana. Evolution 32, 850–871.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Howard, R. D. 1981. Male age–size distribution and male mating success in bullfrogs. In Alexander, R. D. and Tinkle, D. W. (eds.) Natural Selection and Social Behavior: Recent Research and New Theory, pp. 61–77. New York: Chiron Press.Google Scholar
Howard, R. D. 1984. Alternative mating behaviors of young bullfrogs. American Zoologist 24, 397–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hugie, D. M. and Lank, D. B. 1997. The resident's dilemma: a female choice model for the evolution of alternative mating strategies in lekking male ruffs (Philomachus pugnax). Behavioral Ecology 8, 218–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutchings, J. A. and Myers, R. A. 1994. The evolution of alternative mating strategies in variable environments. Evolutionary Ecology 8, 256–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnstone, R. A. 2000. Conflicts of interest in signal evolution. In Espmark, Y., Amundsen, T., and Rosenqvist, G. (eds.) Animal Signals: Signalling and Signal Design in Animal Communication, pp. 465–485. Trondheim, Norway: Tapir Academic Press.Google Scholar
Johnstone, R. A. and Grafen, A. 1992. The continuous Sir Philip Sidney Game: a simple model of biological signalling. Journal of Theoretical Biology 156, 215–234.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnstone, R. A. and Grafen, A. 1993. Dishonesty and the handicap principle. Animal Behaviour 46, 759–764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Judge, K. A. and Brooks, R. J. 2001. Chorus participation by male bullfrogs, Rana catesbeiana: a test of the energetic constraint hypothesis. Animal Behaviour 62, 849–861.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lank, D. B., Smith, C. M., Hanotte, O., Burke, T., and Cooke, F. 1995. Genetic polymorphism for alternative mating behaviour in lekking male ruff. Nature 378, 59–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lank, D. B., Coupe, M., and Wynne-Edwards, K. E. 1999. Testosterone-induced male traits in female ruffs (Philomachus pugnax): autosomal inheritance and gender differentiation. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 266, 2323–2330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lucas, J. R. and Howard, R. D. 1995. On alternative reproductive tactics in anurans: dynamic games with density and frequency dependence. American Naturalist 146, 365–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lucas, J. R., Howard, R. D., and Palmer, J. G. 1996. Callers and satellites: chorus behaviour in anurans as a stochastic dynamic game. Animal Behaviour 51, 501–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marler, C. A. and Ryan, M. J. 1996. Energetic constraints and steroid hormone correlates of male calling behaviour in the túngara frog. Journal of Zoology 240, 397–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maynard Smith, J. 1982. Evolution and the Theory of Games. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maynard Smith, J. 1991. Honest signalling: the Philip Sidney Game. Animal Behaviour 42, 1034–1035.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayr, E. 1983. How to carry out the adaptationist program. American Naturalist 121, 324–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCauley, S. J., Bouchard, S. S., Farina, B. J., et al. 2000. Energetic dynamics and anuran breeding phenology: insights from a dynamic game. Behavioral Ecology 11, 429–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McNamara, J. M., Webb, J. N., Collins, E. J., Szekely, T., and Houston, A. I. 1997. A general technique for computing evolutionary stable strategies based on errors in decision-making. Journal of Theoretical Biology 189, 211–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miyamoto, M. M. and Cane, J. H. 1980. Behavioral observations of noncalling males in Costa Rican Hyla ebraccata. Biotropica 12, 225–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moczek, A. P., Hunt, J., Emlen, D. J., and Simmons, L. W. 2002. Threshold evolution in exotic populations of a polyphenic beetle. Evolutionary Ecology Research 4, 587–601.Google ScholarPubMed
Morin, P. J., Lawler, S. P., and Johnson, E. A. 1990. Ecology and breeding phenology of larval Hyla andersonii: the disadvantages of breeding late. Ecology 71, 1590–1598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, C. G. 1994a. Chorus tenure of male barking treefrogs, Hyla gratiosa. Animal Behaviour 48, 763–777.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, C. G. 1994b. Determinants of chorus tenure in barking treefrogs (Hyla gratiosa). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 34, 285–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parker, G. A. 1984. Evolutionarily stable strategies. In Krebs, J. R. and Davies, N. B. (eds.) Behavioural Ecology: An Evolutionary Approach, pp. 30–61. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Scientific.Google Scholar
Parker, G. A. 1990. Sperm competition games: raffles and roles. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 242, 120–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perrill, S. A. and Magier, M. 1988. Male mating behavior in Acris crepitans. Copeia, 245–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perrill, S. A., Gerhardt, H. C., and Daniel, R. 1978. Sexual parasitism in the green treefrog (Hyla cinerea). Science 200, 1179–1180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pravosudov, V. V. and Lucas, J. R. 2001. A dynamic model of energy management in small food-caching passerine birds. Behavioral Ecology 12, 207–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Proulx, S. R., Day, T., and Rowe, L. 2002. Older males signal more reliably. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 269, 2291–2299.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ritke, M. E., Babb, J. G., and Ritke, M. K. 1992. Temporal patterns of reproductive activity in the gray treefrog (Hyla chrysoscelis). Journal of Herpetology 26, 107–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, J. G. M. 1986. Male territoriality, fighting and assessment of fighting ability in the Australian frog Uperoleia rugosa. Animal Behaviour 34, 763–772.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roff, D. A. 1992. The Evolution of Life Histories: Theory and Analysis. New York: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
Ryan, M. J., Tuttle, M. D., and Taft, L. K. 1981. The costs and benefits of frog chorusing behavior. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 8, 273–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schlichting, C. D. and Pigliucci, M. 1998. Phenotypic Evolution: A Reaction Norm Perspective. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.Google Scholar
Shuster, S. M. and Guthrie, E. E. 1999. The effects of temperature and food availability on adult body length in natural and laboratory populations of Paracerceis sculpta (Holmes), a Gulf of California isopod. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 233, 269–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shuster, S. M. and Wade, M. J. 2003. Mating Systems and Mating Strategies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Siller, S. 1998. A note on errors in Grafen's strategic handicap models. Journal of Theoretical Biology 195, 413–417.Google ScholarPubMed
Sinervo, B. and Lively, C. M. 1996. The rock–paper–sissors game and the evolution of alternative male strategies. Nature 380, 240–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sinervo, B., Bleay, C., and Adamopoulou, C. 2001. Social causes of correlational selection and the resolution of a heritable throat color polymorphism in a lizard. Evolution 55, 2040–2052.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skubic, E., Taborsky, M., McNamara, J. M., and Houston, A. I. 2004. When to parasitize? A dynamic optimization model of reproductive strategies in a cooperative breeder. Journal of Theoretical Biology 227, 487–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stearns, S. C. 1992. The Evolution of Life Histories. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Stephens, D. W. and Krebs, J. R. 1986. The Theory of Foraging Behavior. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Sullivan, B. K. 1982. Male mating behaviour in the Great Plains toad (Bufo cognatus). Animal Behaviour 30, 939–940.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taborsky, M. 1998. Sperm competition in fish: “bourgeois” males and parasitic spawning. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 13, 222–227.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taborsky, M. 2001. The evolution of bourgeois, parasitic, and cooperative reproduction behaviors in fishes. Journal of Heredity 92, 100–110.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taigen, T. L. and Wells, K. D. 1985. Energetics of vocalization by an anuran amphibian (Hyla versicolor). Journal of Comparative Physiology B 155, 163–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tejedo, M. 1992. Large male mating advantage in natterjack toads, Bufo calamita: sexual selection or energetic constraints?Animal Behaviour 44, 557–569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Telford, S. R. and Dyson, M. L. 1990. The effect of rainfall on interclutch interval in painted reed frogs (Hyperolius marmoratus). Copeia, 644–648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vehrencamp, S. L. 2000. Handicap, index, and conventional signal elements of bird song. In Espmark, Y., Amundsen, T., and Rosenqvist, G. (eds.) Animal Signals: Signalling and Signal Design in Animal Communication, pp. 277–300. Trondheim, Norway: Tapir Academic Press.Google Scholar
Wagner, W. E. Jr. and Sullivan, B. K. 1992. Chorus organization in the Gulf Coast toad (Bufo valliceps): male and female behavior and the opportunity for sexual selection. Copeia, 647–658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waltz, E. C. 1982. Alternative mating tactics and the law of diminishing returns: the satellite threshold model. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 10, 75–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zahavi, A. 1975. Mate selection: a selection for a handicap. Journal of Theoretical Biology 53, 205–214.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×