4.2 Article

The evolution of social inbreeding mating systems in spiders: limited male mating dispersal and lack of pre-copulatory inbreeding avoidance in a subsocial predecessor

期刊

BIOLOGICAL JOURNAL OF THE LINNEAN SOCIETY
卷 98, 期 4, 页码 851-859

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1111/j.1095-8312.2009.01322.x

关键词

Eresidae; evolution of sociality; polyandry; Stegodyphus; Stegodyphus tentoriicola

资金

  1. DFG
  2. DAAD

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cooperation and group living are extremely rare in spiders and only few species are known to be permanently social. Inbreeding is a key characteristic of social spiders, resulting in high degrees of within-colony relatedness that may foster kin-selected benefits of cooperation. Accordingly, philopatry and regular inbreeding are suggested to play a major role in the repeated independent origins of sociality in spiders. We conducted field observations and laboratory experiments to investigate the mating system of the subsocial spider Stegodyphus tentoriicola. The species is suggested to resemble the 'missing link' in the transition from subsociality to permanent sociality in Stegodyphus spiders because its social period is prolonged in comparison to other subsocial species. Individuals in our two study populations were spatially clustered around maternal nests, indicating that clusters consist of family groups as found in the subsocial congener Stegodyphus lineatus. Male mating dispersal was limited and we found no obvious pre-copulatory inbreeding avoidance, suggesting a high likelihood of mating with close kin. Rates of polygamy were low, a pattern ensuring high relatedness within broods. In combination with ecological constraints, such as high costs of dispersal, our findings are consistent with the hypothesis that the extended social period in S. tentoriicola is accompanied with adaptations that facilitate the transition towards permanent sociality. (C) 2009 The Linnean Society of London, Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 2009, 98, 851-859.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据