<< Chapter < Page | Chapter >> Page > |
The original three proposed models to account for lek formation are the “preference,” “hotspot,” and “hotshot” models. The preference model hypothesizes that leks persist because they are more advantageous for males and/or females than mating at isolated sites, in ways such as decreasing the costs associated with searching for a mate or giving honest signals as to the strength and fitness of the males on lek (Westcott 1994). The hotspot model suggests that female movement patterns and behaviors are the cause of lek formation and males lek in areas of highest female density (Westcott 1994). The hotshot model proposes that, due to the inherent variation in mating success, less successful males tend to cluster around successful males in order to intercept some of the females that are attracted to the “hotshots” (Westcott 1994). To date, scientists have been unable to solve conclusively the lek paradox. Evidence of varying strength and reproducibility for and against these models has been found in various species of lekking animals, and additional hypotheses have developed through observation. For example, some scientists have proposed kin selection as an explanation for the formation of leks, while others support the importance of networking within the lek as a predictor of alpha male fecundity.
Hypothesis | Species | Overview | Literature Cited |
Preference | Black grouse | Females visit larger leks more often | Alatalo et. al, 1992 |
Topi antelopes | - Central males are significantly larger- Females choose to mate more when other estrous females are present | Bro-Jørgensen et. al, 2002 | |
Blue-crowned manakins | - Mating based on display patterns and vocalizations- No mating bias toward larger leks- Prefer males that display more | Durães, 2009Durães et. al, 2009 | |
Mathematical model | Mating bias manipulations had greatest effect on males | Isvaran et. al, 2003 | |
Moor frogs | Males no more closely related than expected by chance | Knopp et. al, 2008 | |
Cichlids | - Average female encounter rate increases with size- Preference for males on larger leks determined indirect choice rather than direct assessment | Young et. al, 2009 | |
Hotspot | Manakins | - Correlation between female home range and male clustering- Males settle at sites with high female traffic | Théry, 1990 |
Neotropical birds | - Hotspots initiate and determine location of aggregation and other factors (predators, resources, etc.) modify size | Westcott, 1994 | |
Kin Selection | Black grouse and ruff | - Number of copulations, per capita, increases with lek size- Small lek: inclusive fitness is high as new males increase lek size/attractiveness- Large lek: negative as alpha males can no effect longer monopolize females | Kokko et. al, 1996 |
Manakins | - No more related than by chance- Relatedness and distance found inversely related- Mean relatedness is negative | Loiselle et. al, 2007McDonald et. al, 2009 |
Perhaps one of the most widely supported models, the preference hypothesis attributes lek formation to the benefits that accrue to either males or females, or both, by mating in a lek as opposed to mating individually, the traditional approach to reproduction in the animal kingdom (Dastagir 1997). Among the benefits to females proposed as explanations are size, i.e. the ability to compare more males at a lower cost, preference, i.e. the ability of females to compare and then to mate only with males that display most vigorously, and “good genes,” i.e. the ideal that only males with well-adapted genes will be able to control and win all of the escalations that occur in order to maintain status as the alpha male (Alatalo et al. 1992, Durães et al. 2009, Young et al. 2009). Other research has shown lek formation being driven by benefits that accumulate for males in the natural pattern of male clustering at sites of high female traffic (Théry 1990).
Notification Switch
Would you like to follow the 'Mockingbird tales: readings in animal behavior' conversation and receive update notifications?