IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v35y2024i2p543-553..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Flexible females: nutritional state influences biparental cooperation in a burying beetle

Author

Listed:
  • Georgia A Lambert
  • Per T Smiseth

Abstract

In species that provide biparental care, there is a sexual conflict between parents over how much each should contribute toward caring for their joint offspring. Theoretical models for the resolution of this conflict through behavioral negotiation between parents assume that parents cannot assess their partner’s state directly but do so indirectly by monitoring their partner’s contribution. Here, we test whether parents can assess their partner’s state directly by investigating the effect of nutritional state on cooperation between parents in the burying beetle Nicrophorus vespilloides. We used a two-by-two factorial design, in which a well-fed or food-deprived female was paired with a well-fed or food-deprived male. We found that females adjusted their level of care in response to both their own nutritional state and that of their partner and that these decisions were independent of their partner’s contribution. We found no evidence that males responded directly to the nutritional state. Males instead responded indirectly based on the contribution of their partner. Our results suggest that parents are able to assess the state of their partner, in contrast to what has been assumed, and that these assessments play an important role in the mediation of sexual conflict between caring parents.

Suggested Citation

  • Georgia A Lambert & Per T Smiseth, 2024. "Flexible females: nutritional state influences biparental cooperation in a burying beetle," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 35(2), pages 543-553.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:35:y:2024:i:2:p:543-553.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/arae009
    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.

    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:35:y:2024:i:2:p:543-553.. 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.