Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T11:15:48.207Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sexual behavior and morphology of Themira minor (Diptera: Sepsidae) males and the evolution of male sternal lobes and genitalic surstyli

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 April 2012

William G. Eberhard
William G. Eberhard*
Affiliation:
Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute and Escuela de Biología, Universidad de Costa Rica, Ciudad Universitaria, Costa Rica
*
1Corresponding author (e-mail: [email protected]).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Probable ancestral types of courtship behavior for most sepsid flies were deduced from the behavior and morphology of a species in the relatively basal genus Themira. At least three of the five behavior patterns used by Themira minor (Haliday) males to court females prior to and during copulation are shared with other, more derived groups. During copulation the male's sternal lobes were rotated so that their brushes of long setae were fanned apart and may tap the female. The morphology of the tips of the male's genitalic surstyli and the muscles attached to them indicate that they are also moveable. This trait, which occurs in several other distantly related species, probably serves to squeeze the female during copulation. Thus, contrary to the impression from previous studies, elaborate courtship before and during copulation may be widespread among sepsids.

Résumé

Les types ancestraux probables du comportement de cour de la plupart des Sepsidae ont pu être déduits du comportement sexuel et de la morphologie d'une espèce du genre relativement primitif Themira. Au moins trois des cinq comportements de cour utilisés par les mâles de Themira minor (Haliday) avant et pendant l'accouplement sont utilisés aussi par d'autres groupes plus évolués. Durant l'accouplement, les lobes sternaux du mâle sont tournés et séparés de sorte que leurs peignes de longues soies sont déployés en éventail et peuvent tapoter la femelle. La morphologie des extrémités des surstyles génitaux du mâle et des muscles qui s'y rattachent indique qu'ils sont aussi mobiles. Ces structures, qui existent aussi chez plusieurs autres espèces de parenté éloignée, servent probablement à serrer la femelle pendant l'accouplement. Il semble donc que, contrairement à ce que laissaient croire des études antérieures, certains comportements de cour complexes avant et pendant l'accouplement puissent être communs à beaucoup de Sepsidae.

[Traduit par la Rédaction]

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 135 , Issue 4 , August 2003 , pp. 569 - 581
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 2003

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.)

References

Eberhard, W.G. 1994. Evidence for widespread courtship during copulation in 131 species of insects and spiders, and implications for cryptic female choice. Evolution 48: 711–33CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eberhard, W.G. 2001 a. Courtship before and during copulation, and multi-stage transfer of material to the female's wings in Microsepsis armillata (Diptera: Sepsidae). Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 74: 70–8Google Scholar
Eberhard, W.G. 2001 b. Species-specific genitalic copulatory courtship in sepsid flies (Diptera, Sepsidae, Microsepsis). Evolution 55: 93–102Google Scholar
Eberhard, W.G. 2001 c. Multiple origins of a major novelty: moveable abdominal lobes in male sepsid flies (Diptera: Sepsidae), and the question of developmental constraints. Evolution and Development [online] 3: 206–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eberhard, W.G. 2001 d. The functional morphology of species-specific clasping structures on the front legs of male Archisepsis and Palaeosepsis flies (Diptera, Sepsidae). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 133: 335–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eberhard, W.G. 2002. The relation between aggressive and sexual behavior and allometry in Palaeosepsis dentatiformis flies (Diptera: Sepsidae). Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 75: 317–32Google Scholar
Eberhard, W.G., Pereira, F. 1996. Functional morphology of male genitalic surstyli in the dunglies Archisepsis diversiformis and A. ecalcarata (Diptera: Sepsidae). Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 69: 43–60Google Scholar
Hennig, W. 1949. 39a. Sepsidae. pp 1–91in Lindner, E. (Ed), Die Fliegen der Palaearktischen Region. Stuttgart, Germany: E Schweizerbart's Verlagsbuchhandling (Erwin Nägele)Google Scholar
Mangan, R.L. 1976. Themira athabasca n. sp. (Diptera: Sepsidae) with a revised key to North American Themira and notes on the sexual morphology of sympatric species. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 69: 1024–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meier, R. 1995. Cladistic analysis of the Sepsidae (Cyclorrhapha: Diptera) based on a comparative scanning electron microscopic study of larvae. Systematic Entomology 20: 99–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ozerov, A.L. 1998. A review of the genus Themira Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830 (Diptera: Sepsidae) of the world, with a revision of the North American species. Russian Entomological Journal 7: 169–208Google Scholar
Ozerov, A.L. 1999. 88. Fam. Sepsidae. pp 556–70 in Lehr, A.P. (Ed), Opredelitel nasekomych Daljnego Vostoka Rossii. T. VI. Dvukrylye i blochi. Cz. 1. [Key to the insects of the Russian Far East. Volume VI. Diptera and Siphonaptera. Part 1; in Russian.] Valdivostok, Russia: Dal'naukaGoogle Scholar
Ozerov, A.L. 2000 a. The Sepsidae (Diptera) of Namibia, with description of four new species. Cimbebasia 16: 31–45Google Scholar
Ozerov, A.L. 2000 b. Studies of Afrotropical Sepsidae (Diptera). IV. Description of six new species and designation of lectotype for Sepsis polychaeta Duda, 1926. Russian Entomological Journal 9: 69–78Google Scholar
Parker, G.A. 1972 a. Reproductive behaviour of Sepsis cynipsea (L.) (Diptera: Sepsidae). I. Preliminary analysis of the strategy and its associated behaviour patterns. Behaviour 41: 172–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parker, G.A. 1972 b. Reproductive behaviour of Sepsis cynipsea (L.) (Diptera: Sepsidae). II. The significance of the precopulatory passive phase and emigration. Behaviour 41: 241–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pont, A.C. 1979. Sepsidae. Diptera, Cyclorrhapha, Acalyptrata. In Fitton, M.G. (Ed), Handbook for the identification of British insects. 10, 5(c): 1–35Google Scholar
Schulz, K. 1999. The evolution of mating systems in black scavenger flies (Diptera: Sepsidae). PhD thesis, University of Arizona, TucsonGoogle Scholar
Steyskal, G.C. 1987. Sepsidae. pp 945–50 in McAlpine, J.F., Peterson, B.V., Shewell, G.E., Teskey, J.J., Vockeroth, J.R., Wood, D.M. (Eds), Manual of Nearctic Diptera. Volume 2. Monograph 28. Ottawa, Ontario: Agriculture Canada, Research BranchGoogle Scholar
Šulc, K. 1928. Die biologische Bedeutung der Bewaffnung der männlichen Vorderfusse bei den Sepsiden (Muscidae). Biologicke spisy Vysoke Skoly Zverolekarske, Brno CSR 7(14): 181–94Google Scholar
Ward, P.I. 1983. The effects of size on the mating behaviour of the dung fly Sepsis cynipsea. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 13: 75–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zerbe, F. 1993. Innerartliche Grossenvariabilität und Paarungsverhalten bei Sepsis punctum (Fabricius, 1794) (Diptera, Sepsidae). Würzburg, Germany: Diplomarbeit Julius-Maximilians-Universität WürzburgGoogle Scholar