acta ethologica

, Volume 22, Issue 1, pp 39–45 | Cite as

Does fluctuating asymmetry of hind legs impose costs on escape speed in house crickets (Acheta domesticus)?

  • Jacob B. PearsEmail author
  • Stephen M. Ferguson
  • Catherine A. Boisvert
  • Philip W. Bateman
Original Paper


Fluctuating asymmetry (FA) is often thought to be an indicator of developmental stability—an individual’s ability to resist environmental and genetic stress during development—and thus demonstrates phenotypic quality. Research on the influence of FA on locomotion has often found that high FA in legs and wings impedes locomotor performance. Crickets rely on their six limbs to flee from predators and parasitoids. Hind legs are of particular importance during escape as they contribute to running speed. FA research overwhelmingly focuses on its impact on sexual selection, with little on locomotion and only one study of the impact of FA on invertebrate locomotion. Here, we examined the effect of FA in hind legs on the escape speed of house crickets (Acheta domesticus) and the locomotor costs of hind limb autotomy. Unexpectedly, our findings indicate that FA of hind legs have no influence on the escape speed of either male or female A. domesticus. This is inconsistent with most research conducted on FA and vertebrate locomotion that indicates FA negatively impacts locomotion, but is consistent with the only research examining FA and invertebrate locomotion. Our other findings were more congruent with the literature on other Orthoptera, as body size was found to have an influence on the escape speeds of intact females and those that lost two hind limbs. Whilst our results indicate that FA did not influence locomotion, this may not be the case for other invertebrate taxa where variation in FA may have an important role in natural selection.


Fluctuating asymmetry FA Autotomy Locomotion Escape speed Crickets Invertebrates 



We would like to thank Raoul Bonini for his assistance during the speed trials.

Supplementary material

10211_2018_305_MOESM1_ESM.docx (14 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 14 kb)


  1. Allen GR (1995) The calling behaviour and spatial distribution of male bushcrickets (Sciarasaga quadrata) and their relationship to parasitism by acoustically orienting tachinid flies. Ecol Entomol 20:303–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Autrum H et al (2012) Comparative physiology and evolution of vision in invertebrates: a: invertebrate photoreceptors. Springer Science & Business MediaGoogle Scholar
  3. Balmford A, Jones IL, Thomas AL (1993) On avian asymmetry: evidence of natural selection for symmetrical tails and wings in birds. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 252:245–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bateman PW (2001) Changes in phonotactic behavior of a bushcricket with mating history. J Insect Behav 14:333–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bateman PW, Fleming PA (2005) Direct and indirect costs of limb autotomy in field crickets, Gryllus bimaculatus. Anim Behav 69:151–159. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bateman PW, Fleming PA (2006a) Increased susceptibility to predation for autotomized house crickets (Acheta domestica). Ethology 112:670–677CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bateman PW, Fleming PA (2006b) Sex and the single (−eared) female: leg function, limb autotomy and mating history trade-offs in field crickets (Gryllus bimaculatus). Biol Lett 2:33–35. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bateman PW, Fleming PA (2006c) Sex, intimidation and severed limbs: the effect of simulated predator attack and limb autotomy on calling and emergence behaviour in the field cricket Gryllus bimaculatus. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 59:674–681CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bateman P, Fleming P (2009) There will be blood: autohaemorrhage behaviour as part of the defence repertoire of an insect. J Zool 278:342–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Baxter C (1979) Cricket predation by the northern grasshopper mouse. Behav Neural Biol 27:201–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Belwood JJ, Morris GK (1987) Bat predation and its influence on calling behavior in neotropical katydids. Science 238:64–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Braña F, Ji X (2000) Influence of incubation temperature on morphology, locomotor performance, and early growth of hatchling wall lizards (Podarcis muralis). J Exp Zool 286:422–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Brautiga SE, Persons MH (2003) The effect of limb loss on the courtship and mating behavior of the wolf spider Pardosa milvina (Araneae: Lycosidae). J Insect Behav 16:571–587CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Campo J, Davila S, Prieto M, Gil M (2012) Associations among fluctuating asymmetry, tonic immobility duration, and flight distance or ease of capture in chickens. Poult Sci 91:1575–1581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Castillo RC, Núñez-Farfán J (2008) The evolution of sexual size dimorphism: the interplay between natural and sexual selection. J Orthop Res 17:197–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Clarke GM, Yen JL, McKenzie JA (2000) Wings and bristles: character specificity of the asymmetry phenotype in insecticide-resistant strains of Lucilia cuprina. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 267:1815–1818CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Csada RD, Neudorf DL (1995) Effects of predation risk on mate choice in female Acheta domesticus crickets. Ecol Entomol 20:393–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dangles O, Pierre D, Christides J, Casas J (2007) Escape performance decreases during ontogeny in wild crickets. J Exp Biol 210:3165–3170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. De Coster G, Van Dongen S, Malaki P, Muchane M, Alcántara-Exposito A, Matheve H, Lens L (2013) Fluctuating asymmetry and environmental stress: understanding the role of trait history. PLoS One 8:e57966CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dongen S (2006) Fluctuating asymmetry and developmental instability in evolutionary biology: past, present and future. J Evol Biol 19:1727–1743CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Engqvist L (2005) The mistreatment of covariate interaction terms in linear model analyses of behavioural and evolutionary ecology studies. Anim Behav 70:967–971CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ercit K, Martinez-Novoa A, Gwynne DT (2014) Egg load decreases mobility and increases predation risk in female black-horned tree crickets (Oecanthus nigricornis). PLoS One 9:e110298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Evans MR, Martins TL, Haley M (1994) The asymmetrical cost of tail elongation in red-billed streamertails. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 256:97–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fleming PA, Bateman PW (2007) Just drop it and run: the effect of limb autotomy on running distance and locomotion energetics of field crickets (Gryllus bimaculatus). J Exp Biol 210:1446–1454. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Fleming PA, Muller D, Bateman PW (2007) Leave it all behind: a taxonomic perspective of autotomy in invertebrates. Biol Rev 82:481–510. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Freckleton RP (2002) On the misuse of residuals in ecology: regression of residuals vs. multiple regression. J Anim Ecol 71:542–545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Galeotti P, Vicario V (2005) Fluctuating asymmetry in body traits increases predation risks: tawny owl selection against asymmetric woodmice. Evol Ecol 19:405–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Guffey C (1999) Costs associated with leg autotomy in the harvestmen Leiobunum nigripes and Leiobunum vittatum (Arachnida: Opiliones). Can J Zool 77:824–830CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gwynne DT (1984) Sexual selection and sexual differences in Mormon crickets (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae, Anabrus simplex). Evolution 38:1011–1022Google Scholar
  30. Gwynne DT (1993) Food quality controls sexual selection in Mormon crickets by altering male mating investment. Ecology 74:1406–1413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hedrick AV, Dill LM (1993) Mate choice by female crickets is influenced by predation risk. Anim Behav 46:193–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Honěk A (1993) Intraspecific variation in body size and fecundity in insects: a general relationship. Oikos 66:483–492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Irschick DJ (2003) Measuring performance in nature: implications for studies of fitness within populations. Integr Comp Biol 43:396–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Leandro C, Jay-Robert P, Vergnes A (2017) Bias and perspectives in insect conservation: a European scale analysis. Biol Conserv 215:213–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lens L, Van Dongen S, Kark S, Matthysen E (2002) Fluctuating asymmetry as an indicator of fitness: can we bridge the gap between studies? Biol Rev 77:27–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lessells C, Boag PT (1987) Unrepeatable repeatabilities: a common mistake. Auk 104:116–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lewkiewicz DA, Zuk M (2004) Latency to resume calling after disturbance in the field cricket, Teleogryllus oceanicus, corresponds to population-level differences in parasitism risk. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 55:569–573CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. López P, Martín J (2002) Locomotor capacity and dominance in male lizards Lacerta monticola: a trade-off between survival and reproductive success? Biol J Linn Soc 77:201–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Manning J, Ockenden L (1994) Fluctuating asymmetry in racehorses. Nature 370:185–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Martín J, López P (2001) Hindlimb asymmetry reduces escape performance in the lizard Psammodromus algirus. Physiol Biochem Zool 74:619–624CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Miura K (2017) Patterns in the autotomized adults of two sympatric, closely related grasshopper species in their natural habitat. Ecol Res 32:379–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Miura K, Ohsaki N (2015) The cost of autotomy caused by the parasitoid fly Blaesoxipha japonensis (Diptera: Sarcophagidae): an interspecific comparison between two sympatric grasshopper host species. Ecol Res 30:33–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Møller AP (1997) Developmental stability and fitness: a review. Am Nat 149:916–932CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Møller AP, Pomiankowski A (1993) Fluctuating asymmetry and sexual selection. Genetica 89:267–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Paukner A, Wooddell LJ, Lefevre CE, Lonsdorf E, Lonsdorf E (2017) Do capuchin monkeys (Sapajus apella) prefer symmetrical face shapes? J Comp Psychol 131(73):73–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Plăiaşu R, Băncilă RI (2018) Fluctuating asymmetry as a bio-marker to account for in conservation and management of cave-dwelling species. J Insect Conserv 22:221–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Puts DA (2010) Beauty and the beast: mechanisms of sexual selection in humans. Evol Hum Behav 31:157–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Sakaluk SK, Belwood JJ (1984) Gecko phonotaxis to cricket calling song: a case of satellite predation. Anim Behav 32:659–662CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Swaddle JP (1997a) Developmental stability and predation success in an insect predator-prey system. Behav Ecol 8:433–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Swaddle JP (1997b) Within-individual changes in developmental stability affect flight performance. Behav Ecol 8:601–604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Swaddle JP, Witter MS, Cuthill IC, Budden A, McCowen P (1996) Plumage condition affects flight performance in common starlings: implications for developmental homeostasis, abrasion and moult. J Avian Biol 27:103–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Tauber E, Camhi J (1995) The wind-evoked escape behavior of the cricket Gryllus bimaculatus: integration of behavioral elements. J Exp Biol 198:1895–1907Google Scholar
  53. Thomas AL (1993) The aerodynamic costs of asymmetry in the wings and tail of birds: asymmetric birds can't fly round tight corners. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 254:181–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Valen LV (1962) A study of fluctuating asymmetry. Evolution 16:125–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Watson PJ, Thornhill R (1994) Fluctuating asymmetry and sexual selection. Trends Ecol Evol 9:21–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Whitman DW (2008) The significance of body size in the Orthoptera: a review. J Orthop Res 17:117–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Wilson EO (1987) The little things that run the world (the importance and conservation of invertebrates). Conserv Biol 1:344–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Zuk M, Kolluru GR (1998) Exploitation of sexual signals by predators and parasitoids. Q Rev Biol 73:415–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Zuk M, Rotenberry JT, Tinghitella RM (2006) Silent night: adaptive disappearance of a sexual signal in a parasitized population of field crickets. Biol Lett 2:521–524CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© ISPA, CRL 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Molecular and Life SciencesCurtin UniversityPerthAustralia

Personalised recommendations