Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-t5pn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T16:16:35.802Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

5 - Contests in crustaceans: assessments, decisions and their underlying mechanisms

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2013

Ian C. W. Hardy
Affiliation:
University of Nottingham
Mark Briffa
Affiliation:
University of Plymouth
Get access

Summary

Summary

Crustaceans have been used extensively to study aggression from a variety of perspectives. Traits that make them good models for studies of aggression include the possession of prominent weapons and a ready willingness to fight, the ease with which they may be obtained and their ease of maintenance in the laboratory. Furthermore, hard exoskeletons mean that equipment such as heartbeat sensors can be easily attached directly to the animals and they are very amenable to physiological investigation. Therefore a feature of studies into the contest behaviour of crustaceans is a strong link between ultimate ‘functions’ and proximate ‘mechanisms’. Given the very wide range of studies on crustacean aggression any review of this group could potentially be extremely broad in focus. Rather than attempt such a broad review, I focus on studies that have combined ethological data with data on underlying mechanisms in order to address questions that have arisen from the body of evolutionary contest theory described in Chapter 2. This has meant that some areas of research on aggression in the Crustacea, such as the neuroendocrine control of aggression and studies of social aspects of aggression such as dominance hierarchies, are outlined only briefly. I consider evidence for information-gathering and decision-making in respect of resource holding potential and resource value, and describe how studies of the underlying motivation to fight can provide useful insights into what information fighting animals might use when making strategic decisions. I also consider studies of agonistic signals, which in crustaceans include visual, tactile and chemical modalities, with a particular consideration of the extent to which ‘dishonesty’ might play a role in crustacean agonistic dealings. I then review physiological aspects of fighting in crustaceans, including studies based on post-fight assays of metabolites and by-products, studies based on ‘real-time’ non-invasive techniques and studies based on a functional morphology approach of investigating whole organism performance capacities. Finally, I suggest ways in which studies on crustacean contests could inform new theoretical models of contest behaviour and discuss the potential for applying approaches used to study crustaceans to the study of contests in other taxa.

Type
Chapter
Information
Animal Contests , pp. 86 - 112
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abrahams, MV, Robb, TL & Hare, JF (2005) Effect of hypoxia on opercular displays: evidence for an honest signal? Animal Behaviour, 70, 427–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adams, ES & Caldwell, RL (1990) Deceptive communication in asymmetric fights of the stomatopod crustacean Gonodactylus bredini. Animal Behaviour, 39, 706–716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnott, G & Elwood, RW (2007) Fighting for shells: How private information about resource value changes hermit crab pre-fight displays and escalated fight behaviour. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 274, 3011–3017.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arnott, G & Elwood, RW (2010) Signal residuals and hermit crab displays: flaunt it if you have it! Animal Behaviour, 79, 137–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Backwell, P & Jennions, M (2004) Coalition among male fiddler crabs. Nature, 430, 417.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Backwell, P, Jennions, M, Passmore, N, et al. (1998) Synchronized courtship in fiddler crabs. Nature, 391, 31–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Backwell, PRY, Christy, JH, Telford, SR, et al. (2000) Dishonest signalling in a fiddler crab. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 267, 719–724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barki, A, Harpaz, S & Karplus, I (1997) Contradictory asymmetries in body and weapon size, and assessment in fighting male prawns, Macrobrachium rosenbergii. Aggressive Behaviour, 23, 81–91.3.0.CO;2-W>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baron, LC & Hazlett, BA (1989) Directed currents: A hydrodynamic display in hermit crabs. Marine Behavior and Physiology, 15, 83–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berry, FC & Breithaupt, T (2010) To signal or not to signal? Chemical communication by urine-borne signals mirrors sexual conflict in crayfish. BMC Biology 8, 25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Booksmythe, I, Jennions, MD & Backwell, PRY (2010a) Investigating the ‘dear enemy’ phenomenon in the territory defence of the fiddler crab, Uca mjoebergi. Animal Behaviour, 79, 419–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Booksmythe, I, Jennions, MD & Backwell, PRY (2010b) Interspecific assistance: Fiddler crabs help heterospecific neighbours in territory defence. Biology Letters, 6, 748–750.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bradbury, J & Vehrencamp, S (1998) Principles of Animal Communication. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer.Google Scholar
Breithaupt, T & Atema, J (1993) Evidence for the use of urine signals in agonistic interactions of the American lobster. Biological Bulletin, 185, 318–318.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Breithaupt, T & Atema, J (2000) The timing of chemical signaling with urine in dominance fights of male lobsters (Homarus americanus). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 49, 67–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breithaupt, T & Eger, P (2002) Urine makes the difference: Chemical communication in fighting crayfish made visible. Journal of Experimental Biology, 205, 1221–1231.Google ScholarPubMed
Briffa, M (2006) Signal residuals during shell fighting in hermit crabs: Can costly signals be used deceptively? Behavioral Ecology, 17, 510–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Briffa, M & Dallaway, D (2007) Inter-sexual contests in the hermit crab Pagurus bernhardus: Females fight harder but males win more encounters. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 61, 1781–1787.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Briffa, M & Elwood, RW (2000a) The power of shell rapping influences rates of eviction in hermit crabs. Behavioral Ecology, 11, 288–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Briffa, M & Elwood, RW (2000b) Analysis of the finescale timing of repeated signals: Does shell rapping in hermit crabs signal stamina? Animal Behaviour, 59, 159–165.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Briffa, M & Elwood, RW (2000c) Cumulative or sequential assessment during hermit crab shell fights: Effects of oxygen on decision rules. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 267, 2445–2452.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Briffa, M & Elwood, RW (2001a) Motivational change during shell fights in the hermit crab Pagurus bernhardus. Animal Behaviour, 62, 505–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Briffa, M & Elwood, RW (2001b) Decision rules, energy metabolism and vigour of hermit-crab fights. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 268, 1841–1848.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Briffa, M & Elwood, RW (2002) Power of shell-rapping signals influences physiological costs and subsequent decisions during hermit crab fights. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 269, 2331–2336.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Briffa, M & Elwood, RW (2004) Use of energy reserves in fighting hermit crabs. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 271, 373–379.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Briffa, M & Elwood, RW (2005) Rapid change in energetic status in fighting animals: Causes and effects of strategic decisions. Animal Behaviour, 70, 119–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Briffa, M & Elwood, RW (2007) Monoamines and decision making during contests in the hermit crab Pagurus bernhardus. Animal Behaviour, 73, 605–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Briffa, M & Elwood, RW (2009) Difficulties remain in distinguishing between mutual and self-assessment in animal contests. Animal Behaviour, 77, 759–762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Briffa, M & Sneddon, LU (2007) Physiological constraints on contest behaviour. Functional Ecology, 21, 627–637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Briffa, M & Williams, R (2006) Use of chemical cues during shell fights in the hermit crab Pagurus bernhardus. Behaviour, 143, 1281–1290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Briffa, M, Elwood, RW & Dick, JTA (1998) Analysis of repeated signals during shell fights in the hermit crab Pagurus bernhardus. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 265, 1467–1474.CrossRef
Briffa, M, Elwood, RW & Russ, JM (2003) Analysis of multiple aspects of a repeated signal: power and rate of rapping during shell fights in hermit crabs. Behavioral Ecology, 14, 74–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Briffa, M, Rundle, SD & Fryer, A (2008) Comparing the strength of behavioural plasticity and consistency across situations: Animal personalities in the hermit crab Pagurus bernhardus. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 275, 1305–1311.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brown, JH, Ross, B, McCauley, S, et al. (2003) Resting metabolic rate and social status in juvenile giant freshwater prawns, Macrobrachium rosenbergii. Marine and Freshwater Behaviour and Physiology, 36, 31–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bywater, CL, Angilletta, MJ Jr & Wilson, RS (2008) Weapon size is a reliable indicator of strength and social dominance in female slender crayfish (Cherax dispar). Functional Ecology, 22, 311–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Claverie, T & Smith, IP (2007) Functional significance of an unusual chela dimorphism in a marine decapod: Specialization as a weapon? Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 274, 3033–3038.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clutton-Brock, TH & Albon, SD (1979) The roaring of red deer and the evolution of honest advertisement. Behaviour 69, 145–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Detto, T & Backwell, PRY (2009) The fiddler crab Uca mjoebergi uses ultraviolet cues in mate choice but not aggressive interactions. Animal Behaviour, 78, 407–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doake, S & Elwood, RW (2011) How resource quality differentially affects motivation and ability to fight in hermit crabs. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 278, 567–573.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Doake, S, Scantlebury, M & Elwood, RW (2010) The costs of bearing arms and armour in the hermit crab Pagurus bernhardus. Animal Behaviour, 80, 637–642.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dowds, BM & Elwood, RW (1983) Shell wars: Assessment strategies and the timing of decisions in hermit crab shell fights. Behaviour, 85, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dowds, BM & Elwood, RW (1985) Shell Wars 2. The influence of relative size on decisions made during hermit crab shell fights. Animal Behaviour, 33, 649–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elwood, RW (1995) Motivational change during resource assessment by hermit crabs. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 193, 41–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elwood, RW & Briffa, M (2001) Information gathering and communication during agonistic encounters: A case study of hermit crabs. Advances in the Study of Behavior, 30, 53–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elwood, RW & Neil, SJ (1986) Asymmetric contests involving two resources. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 120, 237–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elwood, RW & Neil, SJ (1992) Assessments and Decisions: A Study of Information Gathering by Hermit Crabs. London: Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar
Elwood, RW, Wood, KE, Gallagher, MB & Dick, JTA (1998) Probing motivational state during agonistic encounters in animals. Nature, 393, 66–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elwood, RW, Pothanikat, E & Briffa, M (2006) Honest and dishonest displays, motivational state, and subsequent decisions in hermit crab shell fights. Animal Behaviour, 72, 853–859.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Enquist, M & Leimar, O (1987) Evolution of fighting behavior – The effect of variation in resource value. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 127, 187–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fayed, SA, Jennions, MD & Backwell, PRY (2008) What factors contribute to an ownership advantage? Biology Letters, 4, 143–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Figler, M, Blank, GS & Peeke, HVS (2005) Shelter competition between resident male red swamp crayfish Procambarus clarkii (Girard) and conspecific intruders varying by sex and reproductive status. Marine and Freshwater Behaviour and Physiology, 38, 237–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gabbanini, F, Gherardi, F & Vannini, M (1995) Force and dominance in the agonistic behavior of the freshwater crab Potamon fluviatile. Aggressive Behavior, 21, 451–462.3.0.CO;2-L>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gherardi, F (2006) Fighting behavior in hermit crabs: The combined effect of resource-holding potential and resource value in Pagurus longicarpus. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 59, 500–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gherardi, F & Atema, J (2005) Memory of social partners in hermit crab dominance. Ethology, 111, 271–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glass, C & Huntingford, FA (1988) Initiation and resolution of fights between swimming crabs (Liocarcinus depurator). Ethology, 77, 237–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grafen, A (1990) Biological signals as handicaps. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 144, 517–546.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hammerstein, P & Parker, GA (1982) The asymmetric war of attrition. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 96, 647–682.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hazlett, BA (1966) Observations on the social behavior of the land hermit crab, Coenobita Clypeatus (Herbst). Ecology, 47, 316–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hazlett, BA (1978) Shell exchange in hermit crabs: Aggression, negotiation or both? Animal Behaviour, 26, 1278–1279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hazlett, BA (1982) Resource value and communication strategy in the hermit crab Pagurus bernhardus (L). Animal Behaviour, 30, 135–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hazlett, BA (1983) Interspecific negotiations – mutual gain in exchanges of a limiting resource. Animal Behaviour, 31, 160–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hazlett, BA (1984) Variations in the pattern of shell exchange among hermit crabs. Animal Behaviour, 32, 934–935.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hazlett, BA (1985) Communication about shell condition during hermit crab shell exchanges. American Zoologist, 25, A4-A4.Google Scholar
Hazlett, BA (1987) Information-transfer during shell exchange in the hermit-crab Clibanarius antillensis. Animal Behaviour, 35, 218–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hazlett, BA (1989) Shell exchanges in the hermit crab Calcinus tibicen. Animal Behaviour, 37, 104–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hazlett, BA (1996) Assessments during shell exchanges by the hermit crab Clibanarius vittatus: The complete negotiator. Animal Behaviour, 51, 567–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoffman, HA & Schildberger, K (2001) Assessment of strength and willingness to fight during aggressive encounters in crickets. Animal Behaviour, 62, 337–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huber, R (2005) Amines and motivated behaviors: A simpler systems approach to complex behavioural phenomena. Journal of Comparative Physiology A 191, 231–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huber, R, Orzeszyna, M, Pokorny, N, et al. (1997a) Biogenic amines and aggression: Experimental approaches in crustaceans. Brain, Behavior and Evolution, 50, 60–68.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huber, R, Smith, K, Delago, A, et al. (1997b) Serotonin and aggressive motivation in crustaceans: Altering the decision to retreat. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 94, 5939–5942.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hughes, M (1996) The function of concurrent signals: Visual and chemical communication in snapping shrimp. Animal Behaviour, 52, 247–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, M (2000) Deception with honest signals: Signal residuals and signal function in snapping shrimp. Behavioral Ecology, 11, 614–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huntingford, FA & Turner, A (1986) Animal Conflict. London: Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar
Huntingford, FA, Taylor, AC, Smith, IP, et al. (1995) Behavioural and physiological studies of aggression in swimming crabs. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 193, 21–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hurd, PL (1997) Is signalling of fighting ability costlier for weaker individuals? Journal of Theoretical Biology, 184, 83–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jennions, MD & Backwell, PRY (1996) Residency and size affect fight duration and outcome in the fiddler crab, Uca annulipes. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 57, 293–306.Google Scholar
Johnstone, RA (1994) Honest signalling, perceptual error and the evolution of ‘all or nothing’ displays. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 256, 169–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lailvaux, SP, Reaney, LT & Backwell, PRY (2008) Dishonest signalling of fighting ability and multiple performance traits in the fiddler crab, Uca mjoebergi. Functional Ecology, 23, 359–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matsumasa, M & Murai, M (2005) Changes in blood glucose and lactate levels of male fiddler crabs: Effects of aggression and claw waving. Animal Behaviour, 69, 569–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McFarland, D (2006) Motivation. In: A Dictionary of Animal Behaviour, pp. 133–135. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mesterton-Gibbons, M, Marden, JH & Dugatkin, LA (1996) On wars of attrition without assessment. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 181, 65–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milner, RNC, Booksmythe, I, Jennions, MD, et al. (2010) The battle of the sexes? Territory acquisition and defence in male and female fiddler crabs. Animal Behaviour, 79, 735–738.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morrell, LJ, Backwell, PRY & Metcalfe, NB (2005) Fighting in fiddler crabs Uca mjoebergi: What determines duration? Animal Behaviour, 70, 653–662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mowles, SL & Briffa, M (2012) Forewarned is forearmed: early signals of RHP predict opponent fatigue in hermit crab shell fights. Behavioral Ecology, 23, 1324–1329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mowles, SL, Briffa, M, Cotton, PA, et al. (2008) The role of circulating metal ions during shell fights in the hermit crab Pagurus bernhardus. Ethology, 114, 1014–1022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mowles, SL, Cotton, PA & Briffa, M (2009) Aerobic capacity influences giving up decisions in fighting hermit crabs: Does stamina constrain contests? Animal Behaviour, 78, 735–740.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mowles, SL, Cotton, PA & Briffa, M (2010) Whole-organism performance capacity predicts resource holding potential in the hermit crab Pagurus bernhardus. Animal Behaviour, 80, 277–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mowles, SL, Cotton, PA & Briffa, M (2011) Flexing the abdominals: Do bigger muscles make better fighters? Biology Letters, 7, 358–360.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Neat, FC, Taylor, AC & Huntingford, FA (1998) Proximate costs of fighting in male cichlid fish: The role of injuries and energy metabolism. Animal Behaviour, 55, 875–882.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Neil, SJ (1985) Size assessment and cues: Studies of hermit crab contests. Behaviour, 92, 22–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Payne, RJH (1998) Gradually escalating fights and displays: The cumulative assessment model. Animal Behaviour, 56, 651–662.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Payne, RJH & Pagel, M (1996) Escalation and time costs in displays of endurance. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 183, 185–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Payne, RJH & Pagel, M (1997) Why do animals repeat displays? Animal Behaviour, 54, 109–119.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peeke, HVS, Sippel, J & Figler, MH (1995) Prior residence effects in shelter defense in adult signal crayfish (Pacifastacus leniusculus (Dana)): Results in same- and mixed-sex dyads. Crustaceana, 68, 873–881.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plaistow, S, Bollanche, L & Cezilly, F (2003) Energetically costly precopulatory mate guarding in the amphipod Gammarus pulex: Causes and consequences. Animal Behaviour, 65, 683–691.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reaney, LT & Backwell, PRY (2007) Risk-taking behavior predicts aggression and mating success in a fiddler crab. Behavioral Ecology, 18, 521–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Regier, JC, Shultz, JW & Kambic, RE (2005) Pancrustacean phylogeny: Hexapods are terrestrial crustaceans and maxillopods are not monophyletic. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 272, 395–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rovero, F, Hughes, RN, Whiteley, NM, et al. (2000) Estimating the energetic cost of fighting in shore crabs by noninvasive monitoring of heartbeat rate. Animal Behaviour, 59, 705–713.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schuett, GW & Grober, MS (2000) Post-fight levels of plasma lactate and corticosterone in male copperheads, Agkistrodon contortrix (Serpentes, Viperidae): Differences between winners and losers. Physiology and Behavior, 71, 335–341.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smallegange, IM, van der Meer, J & Kurvers, RHJM (2006) Disentangling interference competition from exploitative competition in a crab-bivalve system using a novel experimental approach. Oikos, 113, 157–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smallegange, IM, Sabelis, MW & Meer, J (2007) Assessment games in shore crab fights. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 351, 255–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, IP & Taylor, AC (1993) The energetic cost of agonistic behaviour in the velvet swimming crab, Necora (= Liocarcinus) puber (L). Animal Behaviour, 45, 375–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, IP, Huntingford, FA, Atkinson, RJA, et al. (1994) Strategic decisions during agonistic behaviour in the velvet swimming crab, Necora puber (L). Animal Behaviour, 47, 885–894.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sneddon, LU & Swaddle, JP (1999) Asymmetry and fighting performance in the shore crab Carcinus maenas. Animal Behaviour, 58, 431–435.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sneddon, LU, Huntingford, FA & Taylor, AC (1997a) Weapon size versus body size as a predictor of winning in fights between shore crabs, Carcinus maenas (L.). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 41, 237–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sneddon, LU, Huntingford, FA & Taylor, AC (1997b) The influence of resource value on the agonistic behaviour of the shore crab, Carcinus maenas (L.). Marine and Freshwater Behaviour and Physiology, 30, 252–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sneddon, LU, Taylor, AC & Huntingford, FA (1999) Metabolic consequences of agonistic behaviour: Crab fights in declining oxygen tensions. Animal Behaviour, 57, 353–363.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sneddon, LU, Taylor, AC & Huntingford, FA (2000a) Combined field and laboratory studies on agonistic behavior in shore crabs, Carcinus maenas: Metabolic consequences of variable oxygen tensions. Biodiversity Crisis and Crustacea, 12, 201–210.Google Scholar
Sneddon, LU, Taylor, AC, Huntingford, FA, et al. (2000b) Agonistic behaviour and biogenic amines in shore crabs Carcinus maenas. Journal of Experimental Biology, 203, 537–545.Google ScholarPubMed
Sneddon, LU, Huntingford, FA, Taylor, AC, et al. (2000c) Weapon strength and competitive success in the fights of shore crabs (Carcinus maenas). Journal of Zoology, 250, 397–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sneddon, LU, Huntingford, FA, Taylor, AC, et al. (2003) Female sex pheromone-mediated effects on behavior and consequences of male competition in the shore crab (Carcinus maenas). Journal of Chemical Ecology, 29, 55–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, PW & Elwood, RW (2003) The mismeasure of animal contests. Animal Behaviour, 65, 1195–1202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thorpe, KE, Huntingford, FA & Taylor, AC (1994) Relative size and agonistic behaviour in female velvet swimming crabs, Necora puber. Behavioural Processes, 32, 234–246.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thorpe, KE, Taylor, AC & Huntingford, FA (1995) How costly is fighting? Physiological effects of sustained exercise and fighting in swimming crabs, Necora puber (L) (Brachyura, Portunidae). Animal Behaviour, 50, 1657–1666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tricarico, E & Gherardi, F (2007) The past ownership of a resource effects the agonistic behavior of hermit crabs. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 61, 1945–1953.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tricarico, E, Benvenuto, C, Buccianti, A, et al. (2008) Morphological traits determine the winner of ‘symmetric’ fights in hermit crabs. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 354, 150–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turner, GF & Huntingford, FA (1986) A problem for game-theory analysis – Assessment and intention in male mouthbrooder contests. Animal Behaviour, 34, 961–970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, RS, James, RS, Byewater, C, et al. (2009) Costs and benefits of increased weapon size differ between sexes of the slender crayfish Cherax dispar. Journal of Experimental Biology, 212, 853–858.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×