Male dominance and immunocompetence in a field cricket
By M. Rantala, R. Kortet. 2004
108 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Genetics
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/2c072504fd3a454eb98e2e2bad98dee545f01642
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
In Genetics
Citations in the corpus
- The scent of dominance: female field crickets use odour to predict the outcome of male competition (2005, methodology): “Both males within a pair and one female (to trigger males to fight) were introduced into a sand-covered plastic arena under red-light illumination (L20 cm × W20 cm, depth 20 cm; method modified from Rantala and Kortet 2004 ).”
- A behavioural syndrome in the field cricket Gryllus integer: intrasexual aggression is correlated with activity in a novel environment (2007, background): “…1961; Simmons, 1986a; Adamo & Hoy, 1995; Hofmann & Schildberger, 2001; Kortet & Hedrick, 2005; Väänänen, Kortet & Rantala, 2006), and success in intrasexual competition can result in increased fertilization success for dominant males (Simmons, 1986b; Rantala & Kortet, 2004; Kortet & Hedrick, 2005).”
- An analysis of trade‐offs in immune function, body size and development time in the Mediterranean Field Cricket, Gryllus bimaculatus (2005, background): “…the courtship song of males with high encapsulation rate (Rantala & Kortet 2003), that males with higher encapsulation rate were more successful in male– male competition (Rantala & Kortet 2004) and that the most symmetrical males had the strongest encapsulation rate (Rantala et al. 2004).”
- A functional perspective on sexual selection: insights and future prospects (2006, result): “Although high metabolic rates have generally been assumed to be a cost of dominance (Røskaft et al. 1986; Hogstad 1987; Bryant & Newton 1994; Reinertson & Hogstad 1994; Whiting et al. 2003; but see Metcalfe et al. 1995), recent studies on animal signalling have reported conflicting results for…”