Does dichromatism variation affect sex recognition in dwarf geckos?

REFERENCES

• Adkins-Regan E. 1998. Hormonal mechanisms of mate choice. American Zoologist 38: 166–178.
   Google Scholar
• Andersson M. 1994. Sexual selection. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Andersson M. & Simmons L.W. 2006. Sexual selection and mate choice. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 21: 296–302.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrew R.J. 1956. The aggressive and courtship behavior of certain emberizines. Behaviour 10: 255–308.
   Google Scholar
• Arnold E.N. 1993. Historical changes in the ecology and ehavior of semaphore geckos (Pristurus, Gekkonidae) and their relatives. Journal of Zoology 229: 353–384.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arnold E.N. 2009. Relationships, evolution and biogeography of semaphore geckos, Pristurus (Squamata, Sphaerodactylidae) based on morphology. Zootaxa 2060: 1–21.
   Google Scholar
• Baerends G. 1975. An evaluation of the conflict hypothesis as an explanatory principle for the evolution of display, pp. 187–227. In: Baerends G. et al., Eds. Function and evolution in behaviour. London: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bailey N.W. & Zuk M. 2009. Same-sex sexual behavior and evolution. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 24: 439–446.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bakeman R. & Quera V. 1995. Analyzing interaction: sequential analysis with SDIS and GSEQ. New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Barlow G.W. 2000. The cichlid fishes: nature’s grand experiment in evolution. Cambridge: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Berglund A., Bisazza A. & Pilastro A. 1996. Armaments and ornaments: an evolutionary explanation of traits of dual utility. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 58: 385–399.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blomberg S.P., Garland T. Jr & Ives A.R. 2003. Testing for phylogenetic signal in comparative data: behavioral traits are more labile. Evolution 57: 717–745.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borgia G. 2006. Preexisting male traits are important in the evolution of elaborated male sexual display, pp. 249–303. In: Brockmann H.J. et al., Eds. Advances in the study of behavior. Volume 36. New York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brandt Y. 2003. Lizard threat display handicaps endurance. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London (B) 270: 1061–1068.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Briffa M. & Sneddon L.U. 2007. Physiological constraints on contest ehavior. Functional Ecology 21: 627–637.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Byers J., Hebets E. & Podos J. 2010. Female mate choice based upon male motor performance. Animal Behaviour 79: 771–778.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carpenter C.C. & Ferguson G.W. 1977. Variation and evolution of stereotyped behavior in reptiles, pp. 335–457. In: Gans C. & Tinkle D.W., Eds. Biology of the Reptilia. Volume 7. New York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Clutton-Brock T.H. & Parker G.A. 1995. Sexual coercion in animal societies. Animal Behaviour 49: 1345–1365.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooper W.E. Jr 2007. Lizard chemical senses, chemosensory behavior, and foraging mode, pp. 237–270. In: Reilly S. et al., Eds. Lizard foraging behavior. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cooper W.E. Jr & Greenberg N. 1992. Reptilian coloration and behavior, pp. 298–422. In: Gans C. & Crews D., Eds. Biology of the Reptilia. Volume 18. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dall S.R.X. 2010. Managing risk, the perils of uncertainty, pp. 194–206. In: Westneat D.F. & Fox C.W., Eds. Evolutionary behavioral ecology. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Daly J.W. 1995. The chemistry of poisons in amphibian skin. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 92: 9–13.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Darwin C. 1871. The descent of man and selection in relation to sex. London: Murray.
   Google Scholar
• Dilger W.C. 1956. Hostile behavior and reproductive isolating mechanisms in the avian genera Catharus and Hylocichla. The Auk 73: 313–353.
   Google Scholar
• Endler J.A. & Basolo A.L. 1998. Sensory ecology, receiver biases and sexual selection. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 13: 415–420.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gamble T., Bauer A.M., Greenbaum E. & Jackman T.R. 2008. Evidence for Gondwanan vicariance in an ancient clade of gecko lizards. Journal of Biogeography 35: 88–104.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gross M.R. 1996. Alternative reproductive tactics: diversity within sexes. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 11: 92–98.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hass C.A. 1996. Relationships among West Indian geckos of the genus Sphaerodactylus: a preliminary analysis of mitochondrial 16s ribosomal RNA sequences, pp. 175–194. In: Powell R. & Henderson R.W., Eds. Contributions to West Indian herpetology: a tribute to Albert Schzwartz. New York: SSAR.
   Google Scholar
• Hews D.K. & Benard M.F. 2001. Negative association between conspicuous visual display and chemosensory behavior in two phrynosomatid lizards. Ethology 107: 839–850.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huntingford F. & Turner A. 1987. Animal conflict. London: Chapman & Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Jacob F. 1977. Evolution and tinkering. Science 196: 1161–1166.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jakobsson S., Brick O. & Kullberg C. 1995. Escalated fighting ehavior incurs increased predation risk. Animal Behaviour 49: 235–239.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kokko H., Brooks R., Jennions M.D. & Morley J. 2003. The evolution of mate choice and mating biases. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London (B) 270: 653–664.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liebert A.E. & Starks P.T. 2004. The action component of recognition systems: a focus on the response. Annales Zoologici Fennici 41: 747–764.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lu X. 2007. Male behaviors of socially monogamous Tibetan eared-pheasants during the breeding season. Wilson Journal of Ornithology 119: 592–601.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maddison W.P. & Maddison D.R. 2011. Mesquite: a modular system for evolutionary analysis. Version 2.75 (Available at: http://mesquiteproject.org).
   Google Scholar
• Manghagen C. 1991. Predation risk as a cost of reproduction. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 6: 183–186.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marco A. & Lizana M. 2002. The absence of species and sex recognition during mate search by male common toads, Bufo bufo. Ethology Ecology & Evolution 14: 1–8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mason R.T. & Parker M.T. 2010. Social behavior and pheromonal communication in reptiles. Journal of Comparative Physiology (A) 196: 729–749.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parker G.A. 1974. Assessment strategy and the evolution of animal conflicts. Journal of Theoretical Biology 47: 223–243.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R Development Core Team 2010. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing (Available at: http://www.R-project.org).
   Google Scholar
• Reeve H.K. 1989. The evolution of conspecific acceptance thresholds. The American Naturalist 133: 407–435.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Regalado R. 2003a. Social behavior and sex recognition in the Puerto Rican dwarf gecko Sphaerodactylus nicholsi. Caribbean Journal of Science 39: 77–93.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Regalado R. 2003b. Roles of visual, acoustic, and chemical signals in social interactions of the tropical house gecko (Hemidactylus mabouia). Caribbean Journal of Science 39: 307–320.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Regalado R. 2006. Reproduction and growth of seven species of dwarf geckos, Sphaerodactylus (Gekkonidae) in captivity. Herpetological Review 37: 13–20.
   Google Scholar
• Regalado R. 2012. Social behavior of dwarf geckos (Sphaerodactylus): a comparative repertoire. Ecology Ethology & Evolution 24: 344–366.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roth L.S.V. & Kelber K. 2004. Nocturnal colour vision in geckos. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London (B) 271 (Suppl.): S485–S487.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryan M.J., Akre K.L. & Kirkpatrick M. 2009. Cognitive mate choice, pp. 137–155. In: Dukas R. & Ratcliffe J., Eds. Cognitive ecology II. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ryan M.J. & Rand A.S. 1993. Sexual selection and signal evolution: the ghost of biases past. Philosophical Transactions (Biological Sciences) 340: 187–195.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwartz A. & Henderson R.W. 1991. Amphibians and reptiles of the West Indies. Gainesville, FL: University of Florida Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schwenk K. 1993. Are geckos olfactory specialists? Journal of Zoology 229: 289–302.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shine R., Langkilde T. & Mason R.T. 2003. Confusion within ‘mating balls’ of garter snakes: does misdirected courtship impose selection on male tactics? Animal Behaviour 66: 1011–1017.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sih A., Bell A. & Chadwick Johnson J. 2004. Behavioral syndromes: an ecological and evolutionary overview. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 19: 372–378.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stuart-Fox D.M., Moussalli A., Marshall N.J. & Owens I.P.F. 2003. Conspicuous males suffer higher predation risk: visual modeling and experimental evidence in lizards. Animal Behaviour 66: 541–550.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thresher R.E. & Moyer J.T. 1983. Male success, courtship complexity and patterns of sexual selection in three congeneric species of sexually monochromatic and dichromatic damselfishes (Pisces: Pomacentridae). Animal Behaviour 31: 113–127.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tinbergen N. 1959. Comparative studies of the behaviour of gulls (Laridae): a progress report. Behaviour 15: 1–70.
   Google Scholar
• Trail P.W. 1990. Why should lek-breeders be monomorphic? Evolution 44: 1837–1852.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Venables W.N. & Ripley B.D. 2002. Modern applied statistics with S (4th ed.). New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Vitt L.J., Sartorius S.S., Avila-Pires T.C.S., Zani P.A. & Espósito M.C. 2005. Small in a big world: ecology of leaf-litter geckos in new world tropical forests. Herpetological Monographs 19: 137–152.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whiting M.J., Jonathan K., Webb J.K. & Keogh J.S. 2009. Flat lizard female mimics use sexual deception in visual but not chemical signals. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London (B) 276: 1585–1591.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whiting M.J., Nagy K.A. & Bateman P.W. 2003. Evolution and maintenance of social status-signaling badges, pp. 47–82. In: Fox S.F. et al., Eds. Lizard social behavior. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins.
   Google Scholar
• Wiens J.J. 2001. Widespread loss of sexually selected traits: how the peacock lost its spots. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 16: 517–523.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yabuta S. 2008. Evolution of cross-contextual displays: the role of risk of inappropriate attacks on nonopponents, such as partners. Animal Behaviour 7: 865–870.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zuk M. & Kolluru I.C. 1998. Exploitation of sexual signals by predators and parasitoids. Quarterly Review of Biology 73: 415–438.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar