Jianping YU,Cheng CHEN,Long JIN,et al.No Evidence for Significant Effect of Body Size and Age on Male Mating Success in the Spot-legged Treefrog[J].Asian Herpetological Research(AHR),2016,7(1):41-45.[doi:10.16373/j.cnki.ahr.150064]
Click Copy

No Evidence for Significant Effect of Body Size and Age on Male Mating Success in the Spot-legged Treefrog
Share To:

Asian Herpetological Research[ISSN:2095-0357/CN:51-1735/Q]

2016 VoI.7 No.1
Research Field:
Publishing date:


No Evidence for Significant Effect of Body Size and Age on Male Mating Success in the Spot-legged Treefrog
Jianping YU Cheng CHEN Long JIN Li ZHAO and Wenbo LIAO*
Key Laboratory of Southwest China Wildlife Resources Conservation (Ministry of Education), China West Normal University, Nanchong 637009, Sichuan, China
age body size male mating success Polypedates megacephalus size-assortative
In anurans, body size and age of individuals generally affect male mating success. To test whether body size and age have effects on male mating success in the foam-nesting treefrog Polypedates megacephalus, a species widely distributed in China, we analyzed differences in body size and age between mated and unmated males for three populations using a Generalized Linear Mixed Model (GLMM). The results showed that mated males did not exhibit larger body size and older age than unmated males, suggesting that large and/or old male individuals did not have greater mating success than small and/or young males. Moreover, we also found a non-significant size-assortative mating pattern for all populations. Our findings suggest that body size and age of the foam-nesting treefrog do not affect male mating success.


Andersson M. 1994. Sexual Selection. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Arak A. 1983. Male–male competition and mate choice in anuran amphibians. In: Bateson P. (ed). Mate Choice. pp.181–210. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Awata S., Takeuchi H., Kohda M. 2006. The effect of body size on mating system and parental roles in a biparental cichlid fish (Julidochromis transcriptus): A preliminary laboratory experiment. J Ethol, 24: 125–132
Bell M. B. V. 2010. Sex and age influence responses to changes in the cost of cooperative care in a social carnivore. Beha Ecol, 21: 1118–1123
Briggs V. S. 2008. Mating patterns of Red-Eyed Treefrogs, Agalychnis callidryas and A. moreletii. Ethol, 114: 489–498
Byrne P. G., Whiting M. J. 2008. Simultaneous polyandry increases fertilization success in an African foam-nesting treefrog. Anim Behav, 76: 1157–1164
Castanet J., Smirina E. M. 1990. Introduction to the skeletochronological method in amphibians and reptiles. Ann Des Sci Nat Com Zool, 11: 191–196
Chen W., Lu X. 2011. Sex recognition and mate choice in male Rana kukunoris. Herpetol J,?21: 141–144
Clutton-Brock T. H., Price O. F., MacColl A. D. C. 1992. Mate retention, harassment, and the evolution of ungulate leks. Behav Ecol, 3: 234–242
Cothran R. D. 2008. The mechanistic basis of a large male mating advantage in two freshwater amphipod species. Ethology, 114: 1145–1153
Darwin C. 1871. The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex. John Murray, London, UK.
Davies N. B., Halliday T. R. 1977. Optimal mate selection in the toad Bufo bufo. Nature, 269: 56–58
Emlen S. T., Oring L. W. 1977. Ecology, sexual selection, and the evolution of mating systems. Science, 197(4300): 215–223
Fei L., Ye C. Y. 2001.?The Colour Handbook of the Amphibians of Sichuan. China Forestry Publishing House
Fukuyama K. 1991. Spawning behaviour and male mating tactics of a foam-nesting treefrog, Rhacophorus schlegelii (Rhacophoridae, Amphibia). Anim Behav, 42: 193–199
Gutiérrez G., Lüddecke H. 2002. Mating pattern and hatching success in a population of the Andean frog, Hyla labialis. Amphibia-Reptilia, 23: 281–292
Halliday T. 1983. The study of mate choice. In: P. Bateson (ed). Mate Choice. pp. 3-32. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Howard R. D. 1978. The evolution of mating strategies in bullfrogs, Rana catesbeiana. Evolution, 32: 850–871
Howard R. D. 1984. Alternative mating behaviours of young male bullfrogs. Am Zool 24: 397–406
Huang Y., Zhu H. Q., Liao Y. M., Jin L., Liao W. B. 2013. Age structure, size and growth of a high-altitude bell toad in subtropical montane in southwestern China. Herpetol J, 23: 229–232
Kierl N. C., Johnston C. E. 2015. The relationship between breeding coloration and mating success in male pygmy. Envir Biol Fish, 98: 301–306
Kusano T., Toda M., Fukuyama K. 1991. Testes size and breeding systems in Japanese anurans with special reference to large testes size in the treefrog Rhacophorus arboreus (Amphibia, Rhacophoridae). Behav Ecol Sociobiol, 29: 27–31
Lee J. C., Crump M. L. 1981. Morphological correlates of male mating success in Triprion petasatus and Hyla marmorata. Oecologia, 50: 153–157
Li S. T., Wu X., Li D. Y., Lou S. L., Mi Z. P., Liao W. B. 2013. Body size variation of Odorous Frog (Odorrana grahami) across altitudinal gradients. Herpetol J, 23: 187–192
Liao W. B., Liu W. C., Meril? J. 2015. Andrew meets Rensch: Sexual size dimorphism and the inverse of Rensch’s rule in Andrew’s toad (Bufo andrewsi). Oecologia, 177: 389–399
Liao W. B., Lu X. 2009a. Male mate choice in the Andrew’s toad Bufo andrewsi: a preference for larger females. J Ethol, 27: 413–417
Liao W. B., Lu X. 2009b. Sex recognition by male Andrew’s toad Bufo andrewsi in a subtropical montane region. Beha Proc, 82: 100–103
Liao W. B., Lu X. 2010. Age structure and body size of the Chuanxi Tree Frog Hyla annectans chuanxiensis from two different elevations in Sichuan (China). Zool Anz, 248: 255–263
Liao W. B., Lu X. 2011a. Proximate mechanisms leading to large male-mating advantage in the Andrew’s toad, Bufo andrewsi. Behaviour, 148: 1087–1102
Liao W. B., Lu X. 2011b. Male mating success in the Omei treefrog (Rhacophorus omeimontis): the influence of body size and age. Belg J Zool, 141 (2): 3–10
Liao W. B., Lu X. 2012. Variation in mating patterns in the Andrew’s toad Bufo andrewsi along an elevational gradient in southwestern China. Ethol Ecol Evol, 24: 174–186
Sih A., Chang A. T., Wey T. W.?2014. Effects of behavioural type, social skill and the social environment on male mating success in water striders. Anim Behav, 94: 9–17
Somashekar K., Krishna M. S. 2011. Evidence of female preference for older males in Drosophila bipectinata. Zool Stud, 50: 1–15
Trivers R. L. 1972. Parental investment and sexual selection. In: B. Campbell (ed). Sexual Selection and the Descent of Man 1871–1971, pp. 136-179. Aldine, Chicago
Welch A. M., Semlitsch R. D., Gerhardt H. C. 1998. Call duration as an indicator of genetic quality in male gray tree frogs. Science, 280: 1928–1930
Wellborn G. A., Cothran R. D. 2007. Evolution and ecology of mating behavior in freshwater amphipods. In: E. Duffy and M. Thiel (eds). Evolutionary Ecology of Social and Sexual Systems: Crustaceans as Model Organisms, pp. 147–167.Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Wilbur H. M., Rubenstein D. I., Fairchild L. 1978. Sexual selection in toads: the roles of female choice and male body size. Evolution, 32: 264–270


Last Update: 2016-03-30