IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v18y2007i5p880-887.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Kin recognition and incest avoidance in a group-living insect

Author

Listed:
  • Mathieu Lihoreau
  • Cédric Zimmer
  • Colette Rivault

Abstract

Mate choice theories predict that animals evolved strategies to mate with optimally genetically dissimilar partners, providing fitness benefits. In group-living species, when adults do not disperse, assessment of relatedness between conspecifics can be a key factor for choosing mates. Here, we report for the first time, kin recognition abilities and their implication in mate choice in the gregarious cockroach, Blattella germanica (L.). Binary choice tests showed that females mated preferentially with nonsibling rather than with sibling males, thus avoiding incest. In addition, inbreeding induced an important decrease of their reproductive success. Contrary to what could be expected when females had the choice between a nonsibling strain member and a nonstrain member, they did not avoid mating with distantly related nonstrain members, and extreme outbreeding induced an increase of their reproductive success. Furthermore, our mate choice experiments disentangled the influences of familiarity from those of relatedness and evidenced that kin discrimination was based on genetic cues independently of familiarity. Phenotype matching was a plausible mechanism for kin recognition. Contrary to many insect species, body size was not a salient criterion for mate choice and had no consequences on reproductive success. Copyright 2007, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Mathieu Lihoreau & Cédric Zimmer & Colette Rivault, 2007. "Kin recognition and incest avoidance in a group-living insect," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 18(5), pages 880-887.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:18:y:2007:i:5:p:880-887
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/arm046
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:18:y:2007:i:5:p:880-887. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/beheco .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.