Investigation of female house mice (Mus musculus domesticus) by males in relation to the presence and absence of anogenital odors from dominant or subordinate males

REFERENCES

• Altmann J. 1997. Mate choice and intrasexual reproductive competition: contributions that go beyond acquiring more mates, pp. 320–333. In: Gowaty P.A., Ed. Feminism and evolutionary biology: boundaries intersections and frontiers. New York: Chapman & Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson P.K. & Hill J.L. 1965. Mus musculus: Experimental induction of territory formation. Science 148: 1753–1755. doi:10.1126/science.148.3678.1753.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bateson M. & Healy S.D. 2005. Comparative evaluation and its implications for mate choice. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 20: 659–664. doi:10.1016/j.tree.2005.08.013.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bonduriansky R. 2001. The evolution of male mate choice in insects: a synthesis of ideas and evidence. Biological Reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 76: 305–339. doi:10.1017/S1464793101005693.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brennan P.A. & Kendrick K.M. 2006. Mammalian social odours: attraction and individual recognition. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London (Series B-Biological Sciences) 361: 2061–2078.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bronson F.H. 1976. Urine marking in mice: causes and effects, pp. 119–141. In: Doty R.L., Ed. Mammalian olfaction, reproductive processes, and behavior. New York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bronson F.H. 1979. The reproductive ecology of the house mouse. The Quarterly Review of Biology 54 (3): 265–299. doi:10.1086/411295.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooper R.L., Goldman J.M. & Vandenbergh J.G. 1993. Monitoring of the estrous cycle in the laboratory rodent by vaginal lavage, pp. 45–55. In: Tyson A.C., Ed. Female reproductive toxicology: methods in toxicology. New York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Crowcroft P. & Rowe F. 1963. Social organization and territorial behaviour in the wild house mouse. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London 140: 517–531. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7998.1963.tb01871.x.
   Google Scholar
• Dean M.D., Ardlie K.G. & Nachman M.W. 2006. The frequency of multiple paternity suggests that sperm competition is common in house mice (Mus domesticus). Molecular Ecology 15: 4141–4151. doi:10.1111/j.1365-294X.2006.03068.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Desjardins C., Maruniak J.A. & Bronson F.H. 1973. Social rank in house mice: differentiation revealed by ultraviolet visualization of urinary marking patterns. Science 182: 939–941. doi:10.1126/science.182.4115.939.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dewsbury D.A. 1982. Ejaculate cost and male choice. The American Naturalist 119: 601–610. doi:10.1086/283938.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drickamer L.C. 1992. Oestrous female house mice discriminate dominant from subordinate males and sons of dominant from sons of subordinate males by odour cues. Animal Behaviour 43: 868–870. doi:10.1016/S0003-3472(05)80212-X.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drickamer L.C. 1997. Responses to odors of dominant and subordinate house mice (Mus domesticus) in live traps and responses to odors in live traps by dominant and subordinate males. Journal of Chemical Ecology 23: 2493–2506. doi:10.1023/B:JOEC.0000006662.93635.25.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drickamer L.C. 2001. Urine marking and social dominance in male house mice (Mus musculus domesticus). Behavioural Processes 53: 113–120. doi:10.1016/S0376-6357(00)00152-2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisenberg J.F. & Kleiman D.G. 1972. Olfactory communication in mammals. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 3: 1–32. doi:10.1146/annurev.es.03.110172.000245.
   Google Scholar
• Ferguson B., Fuentes S.M., Sawrey D.K. & Dewsbury D.A. 1986. Male preferences for unmated versus mated females in two species of voles (Micotus ochrogaster and M. montanus). Journal of Comparative Psychology 100: 243–247. doi:10.1037/0735-7036.100.3.243.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferkin M.H., Sorokin E.S., Johnston R.E. & Lee C.J. 1997. Attractiveness of scents varies with protein content of the diet in meadow voles. Animal Behaviour 53: 133–141. doi:10.1006/anbe.1996.0284.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Firman R.C. & Simmons L.W. 2008. Polyandry, sperm competition, and reproductive success in mice. Behavioral Ecology 19: 695–702. doi:10.1093/beheco/arm158.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gosling L.M. 1982. A reassessment of the function of scent marking in territories. Zeitschrift für Tierpsychologie 60: 89–118.
   Google Scholar
• Gosling L.M. 1990. Scent marking by resource holders: alternative mechanisms for advertising the costs of competition, pp. 315–328. In: MacDonald D.W. et al. Eds. Chemical signals in vertebrates, Vol 5, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gourbal B.E.F. & Gabrion C. 2004. A study of mate choice in mice with experimental Taenia crassiceps cysticercosis: can males choose? Canadian Journal of Zoology 82: 635–643. doi:10.1139/z04-038.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gowaty P.A., Drickamer L.C. & Schmid-Holmes S. 2003. Male house mice produce fewer offspring with lower viability and poorer performance when mated with females they do not prefer. Animal Behaviour 65: 95–103. doi:10.1006/anbe.2002.2026.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harvey S., Jemiolo B. & Novotny M. 1989. Pattern of volatile compounds in dominant and subordinate male mouse urine. Journal of Chemical Ecology 15: 2061–2072. doi:10.1007/BF01207438.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huber M.H.R., Bronson F.H. & Desjardins C. 1980. Sexual activity of aged male mice: correlation with level of arousal, physical endurance, pathological status, and ejaculatory capacity. Biology of Reproduction 23: 305–316. doi:10.1095/biolreprod23.2.305.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hurst J.L. 1987. The functions of urine marking in a free-living population of house mice, Mus domesticus Rutty. Animal Behaviour 35: 1433–1442. doi:10.1016/S0003-3472(87)80016-7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hurst J.L. 1989. The complex network of olfactory communication in populations of wild house mice Mus domesticus Rutty: urine marking and investigation within family groups. Animal Behaviour 37: 705–725. doi:10.1016/0003-3472(89)90057-2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hurst J.L. 1990. Urine marking in populations of wild house mice Mus domesticus Rutty. I. Communication between males. Animal Behaviour 40: 209–222. doi:10.1016/S0003-3472(05)80916-9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hurst J.L. 1993. The priming effects of urine substrate marks on interactions between male house mice, Mus musculus domesticus Schwarz & Schwarz. Animal Behaviour 45: 55–81. doi:10.1006/anbe.1993.1007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hurst J.L., Fang J. & Barnard C.J. 1993. The role of substrate odours in maintaining social tolerance between male house mice, Mus musculus domesticus. Animal Behaviour 45: 997–1006. doi:10.1006/anbe.1993.1117.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hurst J.L. & Rich T.J. 1999. Scent marks as competitive signals of mate quality, pp. 209–226. In: Johnson R.E. et al., Eds. Advances in chemical communication in vertebrates. New York: Plenum.
   Google Scholar
• Johnstone R.A., Reynolds J.D. & Deutsch J.C. 1996. Mutual mate choice and sex differences in choosiness. Evolution 50: 1382–1391. doi:10.2307/2410876.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones R.B. & Nowell N.W. 1973a. Aversive effects of the urine of a male mouse upon the investigatory behaviour of its defeated opponent. Animal Behaviour 21: 707–710. doi:10.1016/S0003-3472(73)80095-8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones R.B. & Nowell N.W. 1973b. Aversive and aggression-promoting properties of urine from dominant and subordinate male mice. Animal Learning & Behavior 1: 207–210. doi:10.3758/BF03199075.
   Google Scholar
• Jones R.B. & Nowell N.W. 1989. Aversive potency of urine from dominant and subordinate male laboratory mice (Mus musculus): resolution of a conflict. Aggressive Behavior 15: 291–296. doi:10.1002/ab.2480150404.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krames L. & Mastromatteo L.A. 1973. Role of olfactory stimuli during copulation in male and female rats. Journal of Comparative Physiological Psychology 85: 528–535. doi:10.1037/h0035319.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levine L. 1967. Sexual selection in mice. IV. Experimental demonstration of selective fertilization. The American Naturalist 101: 289–294. doi:10.1086/282491.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Milinski M. 2001. The economics of sequential mate choice in sticklebacks, pp. 245–264. In: Dugatkin L.A., Ed. Model systems in behavioral ecology: integrating conceptual, theoretical and empirical approaches. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mossman C.A. & Drickamer L.C. 1996. Odor preferences of female house mice (Mus domesticus) in seminatural enclosures. Journal of Comparative Psychology 110: 131–138. doi:10.1037/0735-7036.110.2.131.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Novotny M., Harvey S. & Jemiolo B. 1990. Chemistry of male dominance in the house mouse Mus domesticus. Experientia 46: 109–113. doi:10.1007/BF01955433.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Parker G.A. 1970. Sperm competition and its evolutionary consequences in the insects. Biological Reviews 45: 525–567. doi:10.1111/j.1469-185X.1970.tb01176.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pierce A.A., Ferkin M.H. & Williams T.K. 2005. Food-deprivation-induced changes in sexual behaviour of meadow voles, Microtus pennsylvanicus. Animal Behaviour 70: 339–348. doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2004.10.024.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Potts W.K., Manning C.J. & Wakeland E.K. 1991. Mating patterns in seminatural populations of mice influenced by MHC genotype. Nature 352: 619–621. doi:10.1038/352619a0.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ralls K. 1971. Mammalian scent marking. Science 171: 443–449. doi:10.1126/science.171.3970.443.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rich T.J. & Hurst J.L. 1998. Scent marks as reliable signals of the competitive ability of mates. Animal Behaviour 56: 727–735. doi:10.1006/anbe.1998.0803.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SAS Institute Inc. 2000–2004. SAS for windows: release 9.2. Cary, NC: SAS Institute, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Taylor S.A. & Dewsbury D.A. 1990. Male preferences for females of different reproductive conditions: A critical review, pp. 184–198. In: MacDonald D.W. et al., Eds. Chemical signals in vertebrates. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wong B.B.M. & McCarthy M. 2009. Prudent male mate choice under perceived sperm competition risk in the eastern mosquito fish. Behavioral Ecology 20: 278–282. doi:10.1093/beheco/arp010.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar