Fighting for harems: assessment strategies during male–male contests in the sexually dimorphic Wellington tree weta

By Clint D. Kelly. 2006

115 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Genetics, Insect Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d7d129474ef58c68974c90a95ad156accb3510d4

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

1. G. Arnott
2. R. W. Elwood
3. A. Reddon
4. S. Balshine
5. S. Marsh-Rollo
6. Mark Briffa
7. M. R. Voisin
8. Nandini Menon

In Genetics

1. R. W. Elwood
2. G. Arnott
3. A. Lappin
4. J. Husak
5. Mark Briffa
6. D. Emlen
7. R. A. Van Den Bussche
8. S. Balshine

In Insect Science

1. J. Husak
2. R. W. Elwood
3. Mark Briffa
4. G. Arnott
5. D. Emlen

Citations in the corpus

• The fitness advantage of a high‐performance weapon (2009, background): “Candidate taxa range from insects to mammals with weapons ranging from invertebrate mandibles and claws to vertebrate horns and jaws (Harvey, Kavanagh & Clutton-Brock, 1978; Brown & Bartalon, 1986; Crespi, 1986; Hansen et al., 1999; Sneddon et al., 2000; Derocher, Andersen & Wiig, 2005; Kelly, 2006;”
• Decisions during fights in the house cricket, Acheta domesticus: mutual or self assessment of energy, weapons and size? (2008, background): “On the other hand, the E-WOA model suggests that contest intensity may show a negative relationship with loser RHP (see Payne 1998; Kelly 2006).”
• Assessment of fighting ability in animal contests (2009, background): “However, a number of studies examined here (e.g. Morrell et al. 2005; Kelly 2006; Stuart-Fox 2006) have determined the assessment mechanism in terms of information as recommended above but then tested other specific factors relating to particular game theory models.”
• The Evolution of Animal Weapons (2008, background): “In males of some Australian thrips (Thysanoptera), distended forelegs and spines are used in lethal contests over oviposition sites used by females (55), and male New Zealand stone and tree wetas (Orthoptera) use their enlarged mandibles in fights over harems of females (99, 131, 146, 147, 152, 189)”
• Rules of engagement for resource contests in a social fish (2011, background): “Contest behaviour that does not conform precisely to any of the existing models has been observed in a variety of taxa (e.g. Jennings et al. 2004; Briffa & Elwood 2002; Kelly 2006; Briffa 2008; Elias et al. 2008; Hsu et al. 2008).”