↓ Skip to main content

Agonistic display or courtship behavior? A review of contests over mating opportunity in butterflies

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Ethology, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#10 of 258)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
twitter
23 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
15 Mendeley
Title
Agonistic display or courtship behavior? A review of contests over mating opportunity in butterflies
Published in
Journal of Ethology, September 2016
DOI 10.1007/s10164-016-0487-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tsuyoshi Takeuchi

Abstract

Male butterflies compete over mating opportunities. Two types of contest behavior are reported. Males of various butterfly species compete over a mating territory via aerial interactions until one of the two contestants retreats. Males of other butterfly species fly around larval food plants to find receptive females. Males of some species among the latter type can find a conspecific pupa, and they gather around it without expelling their rivals. Scramble competition over mating occurs when a female emerges from the pupa. Many studies have been performed on territorial species, and their contest resolution has often been understood from the point of view of contest models based on game theory. However, these models cannot explain why these butterflies perform contest displays despite the fact that they do not have the ability to attack their opponent. A recent study based on Lloyd Morgan's Canon showed that territorial contests of male butterflies are better understood as erroneous courtship between sexually active males. In this paper, I review research on contests over mating opportunity in butterflies, and show that the erroneous courtship framework can explain not only territorial contests of butterflies but also why males do not determine the owner of a conspecific pupa.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 23 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 7%
Unknown 14 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 33%
Student > Master 4 27%
Researcher 2 13%
Student > Bachelor 2 13%
Student > Postgraduate 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 67%
Environmental Science 2 13%
Unspecified 2 13%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 7%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 39. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 December 2017.
All research outputs
#357,035
of 12,125,944 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Ethology
#10
of 258 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,927
of 260,910 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Ethology
#3
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,125,944 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 258 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 260,910 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.