Journal of Ethology

, Volume 15, Issue 2, pp 79–85 | Cite as

Delayed mating and its cost to female reproduction in the butterfly,Eurema hecabe

  • Masato Hiroki
  • Yoshiaki Obara


The timing of mating of females under semi-natural condition, male ejaculate production and their effects on female fecundity were examined inEurema hecabe. Age of the first mating of females varied, and the number of matings increased with age. Male spermatophore production depended on age and body mass. The spermatophore mass at the second mating depended only on the interval between the first and second matings. The timing of the first mating and the spermatophore mass did not affect female fecundity. The timing of mating of females relative to the role of male spermatophores in female fecundity and male mating strategy are discussed.


Virgin Female Female Fecundity Female Reproductive Success Field Cage Monarch Butterfly 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Boggs, C. L. 1981 Selection pressures affecting male nutrient investment at mating in Hericoniine butterflies.Evolution 35: 931–940.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Boggs, C. L. & L. E. Gilbert, 1979 Male contribution to egg production in butterflies, evidence for transfer of nutrients at mating.Science 206: 83–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Greenfield, M. D. 1982 The question of parental investment inLepidoptera: male contributed proteins inPlodia interpunctella.Int. J. Invert. Reproduc. 5: 323–330.Google Scholar
  4. Hiroki, M. & Y. Kato, 1996 Age-related sexual receptivity change in virgin females of a butterfly,Eurema hecabe.Appl. Entomol. Zool. 31: 455–458.Google Scholar
  5. Jones, K. N., F. J. Odendaal, & P. R. Ehrlich, 1986 Evidence against the spermatophore as a paternal investment in the checkerspot butterflies (Euphydryas: Nymphalidae).Am. Midl. Nat. 116: 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Kato, Y. 1986 The prediapause copulation and its significance in the butterfly Eurema hecabe.J. Ethol. 4: 81–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Kato, Y. 1989 Difference in reproductive behavior among seasonal morphs of the butterflyEurema hecabe.J. Insect Behav. 2: 419–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Obara, Y., H. Tateda, & M. Kuwabara, 1975 Mating behavior of the cabbage white,Pieris rapae crucivora Boisduval. V. Copulatory stimuli inducing changes of female response patterns.Zool. Mag. 84: 71–76.Google Scholar
  9. Oberhauser, K. S. 1988 Male monarch butterfly spermatophore mass and mating strategies.Anim. Behav. 36: 1384–1388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Oberhauser, K. S. 1989 Effects of spermatophores on male and female monarch butterfly reproductive success.Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 25: 237–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Rutowski, R. L. 1979 The butterfly as an honest salesman.Anim. Behav. 27: 1269–1270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Rutowski, R. L. 1980 Courtship solicitation by females of the checkered white butterfly,Pieris protodice.Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 7: 113–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Rutowski, R. L. & G. W. Gilchrist, 1986 Copulation inColias eurytheme (Lepidoptera: Pieridae): patterns and frequency.J. Zool. 209: 115–124.Google Scholar
  14. Rutowski, R. L., G. W. Gilchrist, & B. Terkanian, 1987 Female butterflies mated with recently mated males show reduced reproductive output.Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 20: 319–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Rutowski, R. L., C. E. Long, L. D. Marshall, & R. S. Vetter, 1981 Courtship solicitation byColias females (Lepidoptera: Pieridae).Am. Midl. Nat. 105: 334–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Scott, J. A. 1973 Mating of butterflies.J. Res. Lepid. 11: 99–127.Google Scholar
  17. Sugawara, T. 1979 Stretch reception in the bursa copulatrix of the butterfly,Pieris rapae crucivora, and its role of behavior.J. Comp. Physiol. 139: 191–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Suzuki, Y. 1979 Mating frequency in females of the small cabbage white,Pieris rapae crucivora Boisduval (Lepidoptera: Pieridae).Kontyû 47: 335–359.Google Scholar
  19. Svärd, L. & C. Wiklund, 1986 Different ejaculate delivery strategies in first versus subsequent matings in the swallowtail butterflyPapilio machaon L.Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 18: 325–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Svärd, L. & C. Wiklund, 1988 Fecundity, egg weight and longevity in relation to multiple matings in females of the monarch butterfly.Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 23: 39–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Svärd, L. & C. Wiklund, 1989 Mass and production rate of ejaculates in relation to monandry/polyandry in butterflies. Behav.Ecol. Sociobiol. 24: 395–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Svärd, L. & C. Wiklund, 1991 The effect of ejaculate mass on female reproductive output in the European swallowtail butterflyPapilio machaon.J. Insect Behav. 4: 33–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Watanabe, M. 1988 Multiple matings increase the fecundity of the yellow swallowtail butterfly,Papilio xuthus L., in summer generation.J. Insect Behav. 1: 17–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Wiklund, C., A. Kaitala, V. Lindfors, & J. Abenius, 1993 Polyandry and its effect on female reproduction in the green-veined white butterfly (Pieris napi L.).Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 33: 25–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Japan Ethological Society 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Veterinary MedicineTokyo University of Agriculture and TechnologyFuchu, TokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations