Cannibalismus sexualis est cannibalismus coniugis a femina ante, per, vel post copulationem effectus.[1] Quae plerumque est res cuius proprietas speciebus plurimorum arachnidorum ordinum, ac nonnullis ordinibus insectorum est.[2] Inter coniecturas ad evolutionem cannibalismi sexualis explanandam propositas sunt hypothesis pabulandi adaptivi,[3] hypothesis nimii hostilis,[4] et hypothesis identitatis falsae.[5] Qui mores sese evolvisse putantur e pugna sexuali, quae fit cum genitales marium et feminarum usus variarent.[6] In multis speciebus quae cannibalismum sexualem exhibent, femina marem detectum consumit. Feminae specierum cannibalisticarum plerumque hostiles sunt, coire invitae; ergo multi mares harum specierum mores adaptivos evolverunt ut aggressionem feminae evitent.[7][8]

Propter pervulgatum cannibalismum sexualem in Latrodecto, nonnullis huius araneae speciebus est nomen commune vidua nigra.
Tenodera sinensis femina marem cum ea copulantem edit.
Nephila sp. conspecificum edit.
Mantis religiosa. Cannibalismus sexualis est paene universalis inter varias familiae Mantidarum species.

Cannibalismus sexualis plerumque videtur inter insecta, arachnida,[9] et amphipoda.[10] Sunt etiam indicia cannibalismi sexualis inter gastropoda et copepoda.[11] Cannibalismus sexualis pervulgatus est inter species quibus est prominens dimorphismus magnitudinis sexualis; extremus quidem talis dimorphismus evolutionem cannibalismi sexualis in araneis propellere videtur.[12]

Nexus interni

  1. Polis et Farley 1979.
  2. Buskirk, Frohlich, et Ross 1984/
  3. Anglice: "adaptive foraging hypothesis" (Blamires 2011).
  4. Anglice: "aggressive spillover hypothesis" (Arnqvist 1992).
  5. Anglice: "mistaken identity hypothesis" (Gould 1984).
  6. Chapman et al. 2003.
  7. Zhang, Kuntner, et Li 2011.
  8. Fromhage et Schneider 2004.
  9. Polis 1981.
  10. Polis 1981.
  11. Bilde et al. 2006.
  12. Wilder et Rypstra 2008.

Bibliographia

recensere
  • Arnqvist, G. 1992. Courtship behaviour and sexual cannibalism in the semi-aquatic fishing spider, DOLOMEDES FIMBRIATUS (CLERCK) (ARANEAE: PISAURIDAE). Journal of Arachnology 20: 222–226.
  • Bilde, T., C. Tuni, R. Elsayed, S. Pekár, et S. Toft. 2006. Death feigning in the face of sexual cannibalism. Biology Letters 2: 23–25.
  • Blamires, S. J. 2011. Nutritional implications for sexual cannibalism in a sexually dimorphic orb web spider. Austral Ecology 36: 389–394.
  • Buskirk, R. E., C. Frohlich, et K. G. Ross. 1984. The Natural Selection of Sexual Cannibalism. The American Naturalist 123: 612–625.
  • Chapman, T., G. Arnqvist, J. Bangham, et L. Rowe. 2003. Sexual conflict. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 18: 41–47.
  • Fromhage, L., et J. M. Schneider. 2004. Safer sex with feeding females: sexual conflict in a cannibalistic spider. Behavioral Ecology 16: 377–382.
  • Gould, S. 1984. Only his wings remained. Natural History 93: 10–18.
  • Polis, G. A. 1981. The evolution and dynamics of intraspecific +4193 predation. Annual Review of Ecological Systems 51: 225–251.
  • Polis, G. A., et R. D. Farley. 1979. Behavior and Ecology of Mating. Arachnology 33-46.
  • Wilder, S. M., et A. L. Rypstra. 2008. Sexual size dimorphism predicts the frequency of sexual cannibalism within and among species of spiders. American Naturalist 172: 431–440.
  • Zhang, S., M. Kuntner, et D. Li. 2011. Mate binding: male adaptation to sexual conflict in the golden orb-web spider (Nephilidae: Nephila pilipes). Animal Behaviour 82: 1299–1304.

Nexus externi

recensere