Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Figure 1 Female receptivity in the Playback Experiment

Published byHolly Washington Modified over 5 years ago

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Figure 1 Female receptivity in the Playback Experiment"— Presentation transcript:

1 Figure 1 Female receptivity in the Playback Experiment
Figure 1 Female receptivity in the Playback Experiment. Panel a is a graph of the mean number of displays (±SE) ... Figure 1 Female receptivity in the Playback Experiment. Panel a is a graph of the mean number of displays (±SE) organized by female state to show univariate comparisons. Significance (as indicated by *) is extracted from model comparisons. Panel b is a graph of the interaction between mating status and hunger status, showing the mean number of displays (±SE) of virgin (black) and mated (light gray) females when well-fed and food-deprived. Unless provided in the caption above, the following copyright applies to the content of this slide: © The Author(s) Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model ( Behav Ecol, Volume 30, Issue 1, 13 December 2018, Pages 27–38, The content of this slide may be subject to copyright: please see the slide notes for details.

2 Figure 2 Latency to begin courtship for males in the Silk Experiment, represented by a survivorship curve. The maximum ... Figure 2 Latency to begin courtship for males in the Silk Experiment, represented by a survivorship curve. The maximum proportion for a given category is representative of the total proportion of individuals that engaged in courtship. Panel a represents a comparison of male response to virgin or mated females and panel b represents the interaction between male rearing and female mating status, comparing the differences in response to virgin or mated females across male rearing treatments. For the legend: “Field + Mated” represents a trial where a field-reared male was exposed to silk from a mated female, etc. Unless provided in the caption above, the following copyright applies to the content of this slide: © The Author(s) Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model ( Behav Ecol, Volume 30, Issue 1, 13 December 2018, Pages 27–38, The content of this slide may be subject to copyright: please see the slide notes for details.

3 Figure 3 Male courtship vigor in the Silk Experiment, represented by the mean number of cheliceral strikes per ... Figure 3 Male courtship vigor in the Silk Experiment, represented by the mean number of cheliceral strikes per courtship bout (±SE) and organized in Panel a by female state and male rearing to show univariate comparisons. Significance (as indicated by *) is extracted from model comparisons. Panel b is a graph of the interaction between male rearing and female mating status, showing the mean response (±SE) of field-reared males when exposed to silk from virgin (black) and mated (light gray) females Unless provided in the caption above, the following copyright applies to the content of this slide: © The Author(s) Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model ( Behav Ecol, Volume 30, Issue 1, 13 December 2018, Pages 27–38, The content of this slide may be subject to copyright: please see the slide notes for details.

4 Figure 4 Panel a shows the latency for males to begin courting in the Live Mating Experiment, comparing the ... Figure 4 Panel a shows the latency for males to begin courting in the Live Mating Experiment, comparing the differences in response to virgin or mated females across male rearing treatments. Panel b shows the latency for females to display receptivity in the Live Mating Experiment, comparing mated and virgin females overall. The maximum proportion for a given category is representative of the total proportion of individuals who responded. For the legend in Panel a: “Field + Mated” represents a trial where a field-reared male was exposed to silk from a mated female, etc. Unless provided in the caption above, the following copyright applies to the content of this slide: © The Author(s) Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model ( Behav Ecol, Volume 30, Issue 1, 13 December 2018, Pages 27–38, The content of this slide may be subject to copyright: please see the slide notes for details.

5 Figure 5 Panel a shows male courtship vigor in the Live Mating Experiment, represented by the mean number of ... Figure 5 Panel a shows male courtship vigor in the Live Mating Experiment, represented by the mean number of cheliceral strikes per courtship bout (±SE) and organized by female state and male rearing to show univariate comparisons. Significance (as indicated by *) is extracted from model comparisons. Panel b shows the latency for a pair to begin copulation, represented by a survivorship curve comparing pairs which included field-reared males or lab-reared males. The maximum proportion for a given category is representative of the total proportion of pairs that copulated in that category. Unless provided in the caption above, the following copyright applies to the content of this slide: © The Author(s) Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model ( Behav Ecol, Volume 30, Issue 1, 13 December 2018, Pages 27–38, The content of this slide may be subject to copyright: please see the slide notes for details.

6 Figure 6 Female receptivity in the Live Mating Experiment
Figure 6 Female receptivity in the Live Mating Experiment. Panel a is a graph of the mean number of displays (±SE) ... Figure 6 Female receptivity in the Live Mating Experiment. Panel a is a graph of the mean number of displays (±SE) organized by female state and male rearing to show univariate comparisons. Significance (as indicated by *) is extracted from model comparisons. Panel b is a graph of the interaction between male rearing and mating status, showing the mean response (±SE) of virgin (black) and mated (light gray) females in relation to the rearing status of their matched male. Unless provided in the caption above, the following copyright applies to the content of this slide: © The Author(s) Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model ( Behav Ecol, Volume 30, Issue 1, 13 December 2018, Pages 27–38, The content of this slide may be subject to copyright: please see the slide notes for details.

Download ppt "Figure 1 Female receptivity in the Playback Experiment"

Similar presentations

Figure 1 Experimental arena to study female locations in response to a green LED. The LED was switched on in the LED ... Figure 1 Experimental arena to.

Figure 1 Experimental arena to study female locations in response to a green LED. The LED was switched on in the LED ... Figure 1 Experimental arena to.
Figure 1 Waveforms of example stimuli illustrating how within-individual variation was manipulated. Invariant signals ... Figure 1 Waveforms of example.

Figure 1 Waveforms of example stimuli illustrating how within-individual variation was manipulated. Invariant signals ... Figure 1 Waveforms of example.
Unless provided in the caption above, the following copyright applies to the content of this slide: Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the.

Unless provided in the caption above, the following copyright applies to the content of this slide: Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the.
Figure 1 Survival plot showing the detection rate of experimental hosts as the proportion butterflies still searching ... Figure 1 Survival plot showing.

Figure 1 Survival plot showing the detection rate of experimental hosts as the proportion butterflies still searching ... Figure 1 Survival plot showing.
Figure 1 Movement of 10 individuals during the last 5000 time steps of 2 example simulations, without (a) or with (b) ... Figure 1 Movement of 10 individuals.

Figure 1 Movement of 10 individuals during the last 5000 time steps of 2 example simulations, without (a) or with (b) ... Figure 1 Movement of 10 individuals.
Figure 4 ROMs have a morph-specific effect relative to active aggression but not display behavior in dominant males. ... Figure 4 ROMs have a morph-specific.

Figure 4 ROMs have a morph-specific effect relative to active aggression but not display behavior in dominant males. ... Figure 4 ROMs have a morph-specific.
Figure 1 Fecal egg counts (eggs per gram = epg) (A through C) and corresponding infection probabilities estimated by ... Figure 1 Fecal egg counts (eggs.

Figure 1 Fecal egg counts (eggs per gram = epg) (A through C) and corresponding infection probabilities estimated by ... Figure 1 Fecal egg counts (eggs.
Figure 1 Data-selection process

Figure 1 Data-selection process
Figure 1 Flow diagram detailing the systematic review process.

Figure 1 Flow diagram detailing the systematic review process.
Figure 1 Schematic representation of the experimental design.

Figure 1 Schematic representation of the experimental design.
Figure 1 Mechanism of mortality benefit associated with radial access

Figure 1 Mechanism of mortality benefit associated with radial access
Figure 1. Medicaid receipt and ACA favorability

Figure 1. Medicaid receipt and ACA favorability
Figure 1 Relationships between probability of prey discard and each parameter explored. To show the most robust ... Figure 1 Relationships between probability.

Figure 1 Relationships between probability of prey discard and each parameter explored. To show the most robust ... Figure 1 Relationships between probability.
Figure 5 The effect of the spider color morph encountered by honeybees in Experiment 2 on the proportion of honeybees ... Figure 5 The effect of the spider.

Figure 5 The effect of the spider color morph encountered by honeybees in Experiment 2 on the proportion of honeybees ... Figure 5 The effect of the spider.
Fig. 1. Relative potency ratios of 13 active ingredients used against a fall armyworm population collected in Puerto ... Fig. 1. Relative potency ratios.

Fig. 1. Relative potency ratios of 13 active ingredients used against a fall armyworm population collected in Puerto ... Fig. 1. Relative potency ratios.
Figure 1 Stegodyphus dumicola build retreats and 2-dimensional capture webs on (a) trees and (b) fences, 2 very ... Figure 1 Stegodyphus dumicola build.

Figure 1 Stegodyphus dumicola build retreats and 2-dimensional capture webs on (a) trees and (b) fences, 2 very ... Figure 1 Stegodyphus dumicola build.
Unless provided in the caption above, the following copyright applies to the content of this slide: Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the.

Unless provided in the caption above, the following copyright applies to the content of this slide: Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the.
Figure 1 Mean (±SE) egg investment in female zebra finches shortly after a second injection with either tetanus toxoid ... Figure 1 Mean (±SE) egg investment.

Figure 1 Mean (±SE) egg investment in female zebra finches shortly after a second injection with either tetanus toxoid ... Figure 1 Mean (±SE) egg investment.
Figure 1 The Kaplan–Meier curves of time to death post first hospitalization. hosp, hospitalization. Unless provided in the caption above, the following.

Figure 1 The Kaplan–Meier curves of time to death post first hospitalization. hosp, hospitalization. Unless provided in the caption above, the following.
AHA: American Heart Association; ALT: ...

AHA: American Heart Association; ALT: ...

Similar presentations

Ads by Google