Abstract
Animal communication often involves a back-and-forth of influence between the sexes. Not only do males produce signals to court females–females often reply back, as is the case in many plant-feeding insects. Here, we explore the behavioral complexity that arises from these interactions. We examine the potential for substrate-borne vibrational duetting insects to serve as case studies of the evolution and evolutionary consequences of mutual influence between the sexes, including mutual mate choice. Female mate choice on the basis of male signals has been documented in several species of insects that communicate via substrate-borne vibration, but it is less clear how often males modify their behavior (up to and including male mate choice) on the basis of variation in female vibrational signals. We assessed the potential for the signals of one sex to influence the behavior of the other sex with a literature review in which we compared the signals used by males and females in vibrational duetting. We found that female signals were at least as long and variable as male signals, although male signals often had more components than female signals. Thus, it seems likely that female vibrational duetting behavior is involved in proximate and evolutionary dynamics involving mutual influence and stimulation between the sexes.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Amundsen T (2000) Why are female birds ornamented? Trends Ecol Evol 15:149–155
Andersson M (1994) Sexual selection. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Bailey WJ (2003) Insect duets: underlying mechanisms and their evolution. Physiol Entomol 28:157–174
Bailey WJ, Hammond TJ (2003) Duetting in insects—does call length influence reply latency? J Zool 260:267–274
Belwood JJ, Morris GK (1987) Bat predation and its influence on calling behavior in neotropical katydids. Science 238:64–67
Bonduriansky R (2001) The evolution of male mate choice in insects: a synthesis of ideas and evidence. Biol Rev 76:305–339
Catania KC (2008) Worm grunting, fiddling, and charming—humans unknowingly mimic a predator to harvest bait. PLoS ONE 3:e3472
Cator LJ, Arthur BJ, Harrington LC, Hoy RR (2009) Harmonic convergence in the love songs of the dengue vector mosquito. Science 323:1077–1079
Clutton-Brock TH (2007) Sexual selection in males and females. Science 318:1882–1885
Clutton-Brock TH (2009) Sexual selection in females. Anim Behav 77:3–11
Clutton-Brock TH, Hodge SJ, Spong G, Russell AF, Jordan NR, Bennett NC, Sharpe LL, Manser MB (2006) Intrasexual competition and sexual selection in cooperative mammals. Nature 444:1065–1068
Cocroft RB (2003) The social environment of an aggregating, ant-tended treehopper (Hemiptera: Membracidae: Vanduzea arquata). J Insect Behav 16:79–95
Cocroft RB (2011) The public world of insect vibrational communication. Mol Ecol 20:2041–2043
Cocroft RB, De Luca P (2006) Size–frequency relationships in insect vibratory signals. In: Drosopoulos S, Claridge MF (eds) Insect sounds and communication: physiology, behaviour, ecology and evolution. Taylor & Francis Group, Boca Raton, FL, pp 99–110
Cocroft RB, Rodríguez RL (2005) The behavioral ecology of insect vibrational communication. Bioscience 55:323–334
Cocroft RB, Rodríguez RL, Hunt RE (2008) Host shifts, the evolution of communication and speciation in the Enchenopa binotata complex of treehoppers. In: Tilmon K (ed) Specialization, speciation, and radiation: the evolutionary biology of herbivorous insects. University of California Press, Berkeley, pp 88–100
Cocroft RB, Rodríguez RL, Hunt RE (2010) Host shifts and signal divergence: mating signals covary with host use in a complex of specialized plant-feeding insects. Biol J Linn Soc 99:60–72
Cokl A, Virant-Doberlet M, Stritih N (2000) Temporal and spectral properties of the songs of the southern green stink bug Nezara viridula (L.) from Slovenia. Eur J Physiol 439:R168–R170
Čokl A, McBrien HL, Millar JG (2001) Comparison of substrate-borne vibrational signals of two stink bug species, Acrosternum hilare and Nezara viridula (Heteroptera: Pentatomidae). Ann Entomol Soc Am 94:471–479
Cokl A, Virant-Doberlet M (2003) Communication with substrate-borne signals in small plant-dwelling insects. Annu Rev Entomol 48:29–50
Conner WE, Corcoran AJ (2012) Sound strategies: the 65-million-year-old battle between bats and insects. Annu Rev Entomol 57:21–39
de Groot M, Čokl A, Virant-Doberlet M (2011) Search behaviour of two hemipteran species using vibrational communication. Cent Eur J Biol 8:756–769
Djemai I, Casas J, Magal C (2004) Parasitoid foraging decisions mediated by artificial vibrations. Anim Behav 67:567–571
Eberhard WG (1994) Evidence for widespread courtship during copulation in 131 species of insects and spiders, and implications for cryptic female choice. Evolution 48:711–733
Eberhard WG (2007) Miniaturized orb–weaving spiders: behavioural precision is not limited by small size. Proc R Soc B 274:2203–2209
Elias DO, Botero CA, Andrade MCB, Mason A, Kasumovic MM (2010) High resource valuation fuels “desperado” fighting tactics in female jumping spiders. Behav Ecol 21:868–875
Evans TA, Inta R, Lai JCS, Prueger S, Foo NW, Fu EW, Lenz M (2009) Termites eavesdrop to avoid competitors. Proc R Soc B 276:4035–4041
Field LH, Bailey WJ (1997) Sound production in primitive Orthoptera from Western Australia: sounds used in defence and social communication in Ametrus sp. and Hadrogryllacris sp. (Gryllacrididae: Orthoptera). J Nat Hist 31:1127–1141
Fletcher NH (1992) Acoustic systems in biology. Oxford University Press, New York
Freckleton RP, Harvey PH, Pagel M (2002) Phylogenetic analysis and comparative data: a test and review of evidence. Am Nat 160:712–726
Greenfield MD (2002) Signalers and receivers. Oxford University Press, New York
Gwynne DT (1991) Sexual competition among females: what causes courtship–role reversal? Trends Ecol Evol 6:118–121
Healy SD, Rowe C (2007) A critique of comparative studies of brain size. Proc R Soc B 274:453–464
Henry CS (1994) Singing and cryptic speciation in insects. Trends Ecol Evol 9:388–392
Henry CS, Wells MLM (2006) Testing the ability of males and females to respond to altered songs in the dueting green lacewing, Chrysoperla plorabunda (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 61:39–51
Henry CS, Mochizuki A, Nakahira K, Haruyama N, Nomura M (2009) Courtship songs of Chrysoperla nipponensis (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae) delineate two distinct biological species in eastern Asia. Ann Entomol Soc America 102:747–758
Henry CS, Brooks SJ, Duelli P, Johnson JB, Wells MM, Mochizuki A (2013) Obligatory duetting behaviour in the Chrysoperla carnea-group of cryptic species (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae): its role in shaping evolutionary history. Biol Rev 88:787–808
Hill PSM (2008) Vibrational communication in animals. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Hirschberger P, Rohrseitz K (1995) Stridulation in the adult dung beetle Aphodius ater (Coleoptera: Aphodiidae). Zoology (Jena) 99:97–102
Kanmiya K, Sonobe R (2002) Records of two citrus pest whiteflies in Japan with special reference to their mating sounds (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae). Appl Entomol Zool 37:487–495
Kozak G, Reisland M, Boughman JW (2009) Sex differences in mate recognition and conspecific preference in species with mutual mate choice. Evolution 63:353–365
Laumann RA, Moraes MCB, Cokl A, Borges M (2007) Eavesdropping on sexual vibratory signals of stink bugs (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) by the egg parasitoid Telenomus podisi. Anim Behav 73:637–649
Mann NI, Dingess KA, Barker FK, Graves JA, Slater PJB (2009) A comparative study of song form and duetting in neotropical Thryothorus wrens. Behaviour 146:1–43
Mazzoni V, Prešern J, Lucchi A, Virant-Doberlet M (2009) Reproductive strategy of the Nearctic leafhopper Scaphoideus titanus Ball (Hemiptera: Cicadellidae). Bull Entomol Res 99:401–413
Mazzoni V, Lucchi A, Ioriatti C, Doberlet-Virant M, Anfora G (2010) Mating behavior of Hyalesthes obsoletus. Ann Entomol Soc Am 103:813–822
McBrien HL, Çokl A, Millar JG (2002) Comparison of substrate-borne vibrational signals of two congeneric stink bug species, Thyanta pallidovirens and T. custator accerra (Heteroptera: Pentatomidae). J Insect Behav 15:715–738
Mitra O, Callaham MA Jr, Smith ML, Yack JE (2009) Grunting for worms: seismic vibrations cause Diplocardia earthworms to emerge from the soil. Biol Lett 5:16–19
Moraes MCB, Laumann RA, Cokl A, Borges M (2005) Vibratory signals of four Neotropical stink bug species. Physiol Entomol 30:175–188
Noh S, Henry CS (2010) Sexually monomorphic mating preferences contribute to premating isolation based on song in European green lacewings. Evolution 64:261–270
Patricelli GL, Uy JAC, Walsh G, Borgia G (2002) Male displays adjusted to female’s response. Nature 415:279–280
Percy DM, Taylor GS, Kennedy M (2006) Psyllid communication: acoustic diversity, mate recognition and phylogenetic signal. Invertebr Syst 20:431–445
Percy DM, Boyd EA, Hoodle MS (2008) Observations of acoustic signaling in three sharpshooters: Homalodisca vitripennis, Homalodisca liturata, and Graphocephala atropunctata (Hemiptera: Cicadellidae). Ann Entomol Soc Am 101:253–259
Peretti A, Eberhard WG, Briceño RD (2006) Copulatory dialogue: female spiders sing during copulation to influence male genitalic movements. Anim Behav 72:413–421
Reinhold K (2011) Variation in acoustic signalling traits exhibits footprints of sexual selection. Evolution 65:738–745
Rillich J, Buhl E, Schildberger K, Stevenson PA (2009) Female crickets are driven to fight by the male courting and calling songs. Anim Behav 77:737–742
Rodríguez RL (1998) Possible female choice during copulation in Ozophora baranowskii (Heteroptera: Lygaeidae). J Insect Behav 11:725–741
Rodríguez RL, Cocroft RB (2006) Divergence in female duetting signals in the Enchenopa binotata species complex of treehoppers (Hemiptera: Membracidae). Ethology 112:1231–1238
Rodríguez RL, Sullivan LE, Cocroft RB (2004) Vibrational communication and reproductive isolation in the Enchenopa binotata species complex of treehoppers (Hemiptera: Membracidae). Evolution 58:571–578
Rodríguez RL, Ramaswamy K, Cocroft RB (2006) Evidence that female preferences have shaped male signal evolution in a clade of specialized plant–feeding insects. Proc R Soc B 273:2585–2593
Rodríguez RL, Haen C, Cocroft RB, Fowler-Finn KD (2012) Males adjust signaling effort based on female mate–preference cues. Behav Ecol 23:1218–1225
Rodríguez RL, Boughman JW, Gray DA, Hebets EA, Höbel G, Symes LB (2013) Diversification under sexual selection: the relative roles of mate preference strength and the degree of divergence in mate preferences. Ecol Lett 16:964–974
Rubenstein DR, Lovette IJ (2009) Reproductive skew and selection on female ornamentation in social species. Nature 462:786–790
Sæther SA, Fiske P, Kålås JA (2001) Male mate choice, sexual conflict and strategic allocation of copulations in a lekking bird. Proc R Soc Lond B 268:2097–2102
Shuster SM, Wade MJ (2003) Mating systems and strategies. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Slater PJB, Mann NI (2004) Why do the females of many bird species sing in the tropics? J Avian Biol 35:289–294
Sullivan-Beckers L, Cocroft RB (2010) The importance of female choice, male–male competition, and signal transmission as causes of selection on male mating signals. Evolution 64:3158–3171
Sullivan-Beckers L, Hebets EA (2011) Modality-specific experience with female feedback increases the efficacy of courtship signalling in male wolf spiders. Anim Behav 82:1051–1057
Uhl G, Elias DO (2011) Communication. In: Herberstein ME (ed) Spider behaviour: flexibility and versatility. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 127–189
Virant-Doberlet M, Cokl A (2004) Vibrational communication in insects. Neotrop Entomol 33:121–134
Virant-Doberlet M, Žežlina I (2007) Vibrational communication of Metcalfa pruinosa (Say) (Hemiptera: Fulgoroidea: Flatidae). Ann Entomol Soc Am 100:73–82
Virant-Doberlet M, King RA, Polajnar J, Symondson WOC (2011) Molecular diagnostics reveal spiders that exploit prey vibrational signals used in sexual communication. Mol Ecol 20:2204–2216
Wells MLM, Henry CS (1998) Songs, reproductive isolation, and speciation in cryptic species of insects. In: Howard DJ, Berlocher SH (eds) Endless forms. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 217–233
West-Eberhard MJ (1983) Sexual selection, social competition, and speciation. Q Rev Biol 58:155–183
Wood TK (1993) Speciation of the Enchenopa binotata complex (Insecta: Homoptera: Membracidae). In: Lees DR, Edwards D (eds) Evolutionary patterns and processes. Academic Press, New York, pp 299–317
Acknowledgments
We thank Rex Cocroft and Gerlinde Höbel for discussion and constructive comments to the manuscript. Funding was provided in part by NSF grant IOS–1120790 to RLR and KD Fowler-Finn, and by University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee Research Grant Initiative grant 101x197 to Gerlinde Höbel.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendix
Appendix
Mean and coefficient of variation for signal length and dominant frequency for males and females of the vibrational duetting species used in the analysis. A dash indicates that data were not available from the references given
Taxon | Sex | Call type | Call length | Dominant frequency | Number of components | References | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mean (s) | CV | Mean (Hz) | CV | |||||
C oleoptera | ||||||||
Scarabaeidae | ||||||||
Aphodius ater | F | – | 0.06 | 19.2 | – | – | – | Hirschberger and Rohrseitz (1995) |
M | – | 0.05 | 21.7 | – | – | – | Hirschberger and Rohrseitz (1995) | |
H emiptera | ||||||||
Aleyrodidae | ||||||||
Aleurothrixus floccosus | F | Iriomote Island | 0.28 | 21.57 | 300.6 | 1.99 | 1 | Kanmiya and Sonobe (2002) |
M | Iriomote Island | 0.25 | 12.42 | 294.6 | 2.27 | 1 | ||
F | Ishigaki Island | 0.31 | 12.53 | 308.1 | 2.92 | – | Kanmiya and Sonobe (2002) | |
M | Ishigaki Island | 0.22 | 21.58 | 292.6 | 5.53 | – | Kanmiya and Sonobe (2002) | |
Cicadellidae | ||||||||
Aphrodes makarovi | F | – | 15.42 | 39.56 | – | – | 1 | de Groot et al. (2011) |
M | – | 13.43 | 24.49 | – | – | 3 | de Groot et al. (2011) | |
Graphocephala atropunctata | F | – | 0.51 | 25.24 | 203 | 31.53 | – | Percy et al. (2008) |
M | – | 1.17 | 19.66 | 235 | 28.93 | – | Percy et al. (2008) | |
Homalodisca liturata | F | – | 1.23 | 11.38 | 95 | 10.52 | – | Percy et al. (2008) |
M | – | 1.26 | 7.143 | 95 | 10.52 | – | Percy et al. (2008) | |
Scaphoideus titanus | F | Call 1 | – | – | 150.5 | 32.29 | 1 | Mazzoni et al. (2009) |
F | Call 2 | – | – | 137.7 | 40.74 | – | Mazzoni et al. (2009) | |
M | Call 1 | 6.2 | 30.64 | 158.8 | 27.01 | 3 | Mazzoni et al. (2009) | |
M | Call 2 | 4.6 | 19.56 | – | – | – | Mazzoni et al. (2009) | |
Cixiidae | ||||||||
Hyalesthes obsoletus | F | – | 0.25 | 7.69 | 287 | 53.65 | 1 | Mazzoni et al. (2010) |
M | Syllable 1 | 0.17 | 11.36 | 576 | 41.14 | 2 | Mazzoni et al. (2010) | |
M | Syllable 2 | 0.26 | 14.44 | 292 | 53.42 | 2 | Mazzoni et al. (2010) | |
M | Syllable 3 | 0.29 | 14.96 | 447 | 34.67 | 2 | Mazzoni et al. (2010) | |
M | Syllable 4 | 0.23 | 13.04 | 379 | 40.63 | – | Mazzoni et al. (2010) | |
Flatidae | ||||||||
Metcalfa pruinosa | F | Call | 2.34 | 22.22 | 463 | 23.11 | – | Virant-Doberlet and Žežlina (2007) |
M | Call | 2.35 | 20 | 442 | 27.61 | – | Virant-Doberlet and Žežlina (2007) | |
M | Phrase pulse train 1 | 4.31 | 31.55 | 414 | 27.05 | – | Virant-Doberlet and Žežlina (2007) | |
M | Phrase pulse train 2 | 2.39 | 12.55 | 446 | 25.11 | – | Virant-Doberlet and Žežlina (2007) | |
Membracidae | ||||||||
Enchenopa binotata ‘Celastrus’ | F | – | 0.7 | 18.7 | 215 | 5.4 | 1 | Rodriguez and Cocroft 2006 |
M | – | 0.52 | 15.43 | 451 | 7.97 | 2 | Rodriguez and Cocroft (2006) | |
Enchenopa binotata ‘Cercis’ | F | – | 0.79 | 24.8 | 118 | 26.9 | 1 | Rodriguez and Cocroft (2006) |
M | – | 0.79 | 18.05 | 146 | 9.9 | 2 | Rodriguez and Cocroft (2006) | |
Enchenopa binotata ‘Ptelea’ | F | – | 0.61 | 18.2 | 167 | 6.6 | 1 | Rodriguez and Cocroft (2006) |
M | – | 0.45 | 16.54 | 333 | 2.64 | 2 | Rodriguez and Cocroft (2006) | |
Enchenopa binotata ‘Viburnum rufidulum’ | F | – | 0.84 | 26.3 | 329 | 58.4 | 1 | Rodriguez and Cocroft (2006) |
M | – | 0.78 | 16.41 | 285 | 4.48 | 2 | Rodriguez and Cocroft (2006) | |
Pentatomidae | ||||||||
Acrosternum hilare | F | Song | 0.64 | 26.17 | 82 | 2.44 | 1 | Cokl et al. (2001) |
M | Call 1 | 0.94 | 0.53 | 120 | 6.66 | 2 | Moraes et al. (2005) | |
M | Song 1 | 2.31 | 20.09 | – | – | 1 | Moraes et al. (2005) | |
Acrosternum impicticorne | F | Call 1 | 0.81 | 4.19 | 133 | 3.01 | 1 | Moraes et al. (2005) |
F | Call 2 | 1.13 | 16.82 | 109 | 5.51 | 1 | Moraes et al. (2005) | |
M | Call 2 | 0.94 | 5.75 | 130 | 1.54 | 1 | Moraes et al. (2005) | |
Euschistus heros | F | Call 1 | 0.95 | 19.30 | 145 | 4.82 | 2 | Moraes et al. (2005) |
F | Call 2 | 5.66 | 21.15 | 157 | 4.46 | 1 | Moraes et al. (2005) | |
M | Call 1 | 1.75 | 34.05 | 137 | 8.76 | 1 | Moraes et al. (2005) | |
M | Call 2 | 4.41 | 13.20 | 136 | 9.56 | 1 | Moraes et al. (2005) | |
M | Call 3 | 0.05 | 16.66 | 175 | 2.86 | – | Moraes et al. (2005) | |
Nezara viridula | F | Calling song broad band | 0.13 | 35.15 | 109 | – | – | Cokl et al. (2000) |
F | Calling song narrow band | 1.66 | 21.91 | 99 | – | – | Cokl et al. (2000) | |
F | Courtship song | 3.91 | 30.19 | 91 | – | 1 | Cokl et al. (2000) | |
M | Calling song broad band | 0.12 | 28.09 | 109 | – | – | Cokl et al. (2000) | |
M | Calling song narrow band | 0.26 | 36.5 | 96 | – | – | Cokl et al. (2000) | |
M | Courtship song | 3.11 | 24.08 | 90 | – | 1 | Cokl et al. (2000) | |
Piezodorus guildinii | F | Call 1 | 4.91 | 13.06 | 168 | 5.95 | 1 | Moraes et al. (2005) |
F | Call 2 | 4.63 | 4.32 | 131 | 1.52 | 1 | Moraes et al. (2005) | |
M | Call 1 | 0.02 | 20.83 | 117 | 8.54 | 1 | Moraes et al. (2005) | |
Thyanta custator accerra | F | Song 1 | 0.34 | 19.28 | 102 | 3.92 | 1 | McBrien et al. (2002) |
F | Song 2 | 3.08 | 69.91 | 97 | 12.37 | 1 | McBrien et al. (2002) | |
M | Song 1 | 0.46 | 36.77 | 97 | 7.21 | 1 | McBrien et al. (2002) | |
M | Song 2 | 2.44 | 32.28 | 95 | 6.31 | 1 | McBrien et al. (2002) | |
M | Song 3 | 9.89 | 30.55 | 98 | 8.16 | 1 | McBrien et al. (2002) | |
M | Song 4 | 0.12 | 17.46 | 99 | 9.09 | 1 | McBrien et al. (2002) | |
Thyanta pallidovirens | F | Song 1 | 0.21 | 30.62 | 100 | 7 | 1 | McBrien et al. (2002) |
F | Song 2 | 3.41 | 39.37 | 105 | 4.76 | 1 | McBrien et al. (2002) | |
M | Song 1 | 0.34 | 24.18 | 101 | 2.97 | 1 | McBrien et al. (2002) | |
M | Song 2 | 3.36 | 20.27 | 96 | 5.21 | 1 | McBrien et al. (2002) | |
Thyanta perditor | F | Call 1 | 13.41 | 14.49 | 1 | Moraes et al. (2005) | ||
F | Call 2, long | 1.46 | 43.09 | 84 | 4.76 | 2 | Moraes et al. (2005) | |
F | Call 2, short | 0.71 | 40.84 | 83 | 4.82 | – | Moraes et al. (2005) | |
M | Call 1 | 7.1 | 9.80 | 122 | 12.29 | 1 | Moraes et al. (2005) | |
M | Call 2 | 3.39 | 29.20 | 109 | 11.01 | 2 | Moraes et al. (2005) | |
M | Call 3 | 2.11 | 21.80 | 70 | 10 | – | Moraes et al. (2005) | |
Triozidae | ||||||||
Aacanthocnema dobsoni | F | – | 0.24 | 8.33 | 925 | 4.64 | 1 | Percy et al. (2006) |
M | – | 1.48 | 25.67 | 698 | 62.17 | 1 | Percy et al. (2006) | |
Schedotrioza apicobystra | F | – | 0.75 | 10.66 | 499 | 23.64 | 1 | Percy et al. (2006) |
M | – | 1.19 | 10.92 | 615 | 13.65 | 2 | Percy et al. (2006) | |
Schedotrioza distorta | F | – | 0.23 | 17.39 | 315 | 36.82 | 1 | Percy et al. (2006) |
M | – | 0.33 | 15.15 | 576 | 21.52 | 1 | Percy et al. (2006) | |
Schedotrioza marginata | F | – | 0.34 | 8.82 | 614 | 9.44 | 1 | Percy et al. (2006) |
M | – | 0.46 | 8.69 | 683 | 19.18 | 2 | Percy et al. (2006) | |
Schedotrioza multitudinea | F | – | 0.3 | 13.33 | 602 | 9.63 | 1 | Percy et al. (2006) |
M | – | 0.43 | 32.55 | 869 | 19.56 | 2 | Percy et al. (2006) | |
Schedotrioza, sp. nov. | F | – | 0.7 | 10 | 268 | 73.13 | – | Percy et al. (2006) |
M | – | 1.09 | 8.256 | 765 | 14.25 | – | Percy et al. (2006) | |
Trioza, sp. nov. | M | – | 0.18 | 5.55 | 690 | 4.92 | – | Percy et al. (2006) |
Trioza, sp. nov. | F | – | 1.18 | 16.10 | 1096 | 0.82 | – | Percy et al. (2006) |
N europtera | ||||||||
Chrysopidae | ||||||||
Chrysoperla nipponensis type B | M | Site1 | 2.14 | 16.82 | – | – | – | Henry et al. (2009) |
Chrysoperla nipponensis type B | F | Site1 | 1.99 | 19.09 | – | – | – | Henry et al. (2009) |
Chrysoperla nipponensis type A | F | Site2 | 5.4 | 16.29 | – | – | – | Henry et al. (2009) |
Chrysoperla nipponensis type A | M | Site2 | 5.43 | 18.60 | – | – | – | Henry et al. (2009) |
O rthoptera | ||||||||
Gryllacrididae | ||||||||
Hadrogryllacris sp, undescribed species | F | – | 0.8 | 27.5 | – | – | 1 | Field and Bailey (1997) |
M | – | 0.45 | 22.22 | – | – | 1 | Field and Bailey (1997) |
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rodríguez, R.L., Barbosa, F. (2014). Mutual Behavioral Adjustment in Vibrational Duetting. In: Cocroft, R., Gogala, M., Hill, P., Wessel, A. (eds) Studying Vibrational Communication. Animal Signals and Communication, vol 3. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-43607-3_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-43607-3_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-662-43606-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-662-43607-3
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)