Fighting without weaponry: a review of male-male contest competition in butterflies

By D. Kemp, C. Wiklund. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 2001

172 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Effects of resource holding potential and resource value on tenure at nest sites in sand gobies (2005, background): “Prior residency is one example (Davies, 1978; Kemp and Wiklund, 2001) and resource quality, e.”
John Maynard Smith and the importance of consistency in evolutionary game theory (2006, background): “Work on butterflies since Davies has not supported the idea that ownership is an uncorrelated asymmetry that determines the outcome of contests for territories ( Kemp and Wiklund 2001 ).”
Does flight morphology relate to flight performance? An experimental test with the butterfly **Pararge aegeria** (2002, background): “The evolution of contest behaviour in butterflies is interesting because they lack any obvious morphological traits conventionally associated with animal aggression, hence the means by which individuals are able to inflict costs upon each other during combat are unclear ( Kemp & Wiklund 2001 ).”
Fighting for harems: assessment strategies during male–male contests in the sexually dimorphic Wellington tree weta (2006, unknown): “Some empirical research, for example in butterflies (reviewed by Kemp & Wiklund 2001 ) and skinks (Olsson & Shine 2000), supports the owner-wins hypothesis of conflict resolution.”