Precopulatory behavior and sexual conflict in the desert locust


Studies of mating and reproductive behavior have contributed much to our understanding of various animals' ecological success. The desert locust, Schistocerca gregaria, is an important agricultural pest. However, knowledge of locust courtship and precopulatory behavior is surprisingly limited. Here we provide a comprehensive study of the precopulatory behavior of both sexes of the desert locust in the gregarious phase, with particular emphasis on the conflict between the sexes. Detailed HD-video monitoring of courtship and mating of 20 locust pairs, in a controlled environment, enabled both qualitative and quantitative descriptions of the behavior. A comprehensive list of behavioral elements was used to generate an eight-step ethogram, depicting from first encounter between the sexes to actual copulation. Further analyses included the probability of each element occurring, and a kinematic diagram based on a transitional matrix. Eleven novel behavioral elements are described in this study, and two potential points of conflict between the sexes are identified. Locust sexual interaction was characterized by the dominance of the males during the pre-mounting stage, and an overall stereotypic male courtship behavior. In contrast, females displayed no clear courtship-related behavior and an overall less organized behavioral sequence. Central elements in the sexual behavior of the females were low-amplitude hind-leg vibration, as well as rejecting males by jumping and kicking. Intricate reciprocal interactions between the sexes were evident mostly at the mounting stage. The reported findings contribute important insights to our knowledge of locust mating and reproductive behavior, and may assist in confronting this devastating agricultural pest.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. That said, if the manuscript is accepted for publication then the reviewer reports can be optionally signed and made public (see below).
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.

  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).
  • If the article is accepted, then the authors are given the option to reproduce the reviewer reports, and their full revision history, alongside their finally published article. In those instances, the comments of the reviewers will be made public (although reviewers' names will never be revealed unless the reviewer opted to sign their review, as noted above).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at