Evolutionarily Stable Strategies for Larval Dragonflies

  • Philip H. Crowley
Part of the Lecture Notes in Biomathematics book series (LNBM, volume 54)


Many animals spend a considerable amount of time and effort watching, stalking, and attacking their neighbors even when it would seem to be mutually advantageous for them simply to ignore each other. A possible example of this paradoxical behavior, interference among dragonfly larvae, is analyzed from a game-theoretic viewpoint to see if such “strategies” appear to be evolutionarily stable. The results suggest that the ever-present possibility of ambush, in which the attacker has a significant chance of seriously injuring the victim, can culminate in “wars of attrition” or pre-emptive aggression by one or both neighbors. Testable hypotheses are presented, and the means of obtaining quantitative predictions from the theory are indicated.


Relative Size Stable Strategy Evolutionarily Stable Strategy Paradoxical Behavior Animal Conflict 
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.

Literature Cited

  1. Alcock, J., Jones, C.E. and Buckman, S.L. (1977). Male nesting strategies in the bee Centris pallida Fox ( Anthophoridae: Hymenoptera). Am. Nat. 111: 145–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baker, R.L. (1980). Use of space in relation to feeding areas by zygopteran nymphs in captivity. Can. J. Zool. 58: 1060–1065.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Benke, A.C. (1978). Interactions among co-existing predators - a field experiment with dragonfly larvae. J. Anim. Ecol. 47: 335–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Benke, A.C., Crowley, P.H. and Johnson, D.M. (1982). Interactions among co-existing larval Odonata: An in situ experiment using small enclosures. Hydrobioloda,in press.Google Scholar
  5. Corbet, P.S. (1962) A Biology of Dragonflies. Quadrangle Books, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  6. Corbet, P.S. (1980) Biology of Odonata. Ann. Rev. Entomol. 25: 189–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Crowley, P.H. (1979) The behavior of zygopteran nymphs in a simulated weed bed. Odonatologica 8: 91–101.Google Scholar
  8. Free, C.A., Beddington, J.R. and Lawton, J.H. (1977). On the inadequacy of simple models of mutual interference for parasitism and predation. J. Anim. Ecol. 46: 543–554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hammerstein, P. and Parker, G.A. (1982). The asymmetric war of attrition. J. Theor. Biol. 96: 647–682.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hartley, C.B. (1981). Learning the evolutionarily stable strategy. J. Theor. Biol. 89: 611–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hassell, M.P. (1978). The Dynamics of Arthropod Predator-Prey Systems. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton.MATHGoogle Scholar
  12. Lawton, J.H. (1970). Feeding and assimilation in larvae of the damselfly Pyrrhosoma nymphula (Sulzer) ( Odonata: Zygoptera). J. Anim. Ecol. 39: 669–689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Macan, T.T. (1964). The Odonata of a moorland fishpond. Int. Revue Qes. Hydrobiol. 49: 325–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Macan, T.T. (1977). The influence of predation on the composition of fresh-water animal communities. Biol. Rev. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 52: 45–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Maynard Smith, J. (1982). Evolution and the Theory of Games. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge.MATHGoogle Scholar
  16. Maynard Smith, J. and Parker, G.A. (1976). The logic of asymmetric contests. Anim. Behay. 24: 159–175.Google Scholar
  17. Maynard Smith, J. and Price, G.R. (1973). The logic of animal conflict. Nature, Lond. 246: 15–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Merrill, R. (1981). A comparison of the diets of dragonfly larvae (Odonata: Anisoptera) coexisting in an allochthonous detritus habitat. M.S. thesis, E. Tenn. State Univ., Johnson City.Google Scholar
  19. Parker, G.A. and Rubenstein, D.I. (1981). Role assessment, reserve strategy, and acquisition of information in asymmetric animal conflicts. Anim. Behay. 29: 135–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Pearlstone, P.S.M. (1973). The food of damselfly larvae in Marion Lake, British Columbia. Syesis 6: 33–39.Google Scholar
  21. Riechert, S.E. (1978). Games spiders play: behavioral variability in territorial disputes. Behay. Ecol. Sociobiol. 3: 135–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Sayan, B.I. (1979). Studies on the foraging behavior of damselfly larvae (Odonata: Zygoptera). D. Phil. thesis, Univ. of London.Google Scholar
  23. Sigurjonsdottir, H. and Parker, G.A. (1981). Dung fly struggles: evidence for assessment strategy. Behay. Evol. Sociobiol. 8: 219–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Thompson, D.J. (1978). The natural prey of larvae of the damselfly, Ischnura elegans ( Odonata: Zygoptera). Freshwat. Biol. 8: 377–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Tillyard, R.J. (1917). The Biology of Dragonflies (Odonata or Paraneuroptera). Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Uttley, M.G. (1980). A laboratory study of mutual interference between freshwater invertebrate predators. D. Phil. thesis, Univ. of York.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • Philip H. Crowley
    • 1
  1. 1.T.H. Morgan School of Biological SciencesUniversity of KentuckyLexingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations