Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 2 Analysis of Courtship Success and Time to Courtship by Male Species, Crossing Type, and Male-like Female CHC Category

From: Influence of female cuticular hydrocarbon (CHC) profile on male courtship behavior in two hybridizing field crickets Gryllus firmus and Gryllus pennsylvanicus

 Female CHC CategoryCourtship Success Odds Ratio (95% CI)Courtship Time Hazard Ratio (95% CI)
Conspecific Pairs
 Male Species: GFML v. Not ML0.781 (0.337, 1.673)1.176 (0.858, 1.613)
 Male Species: GPML v. Not ML0.957 (0.496, 1.846)0.910 (0.645, 1.283)
Heterospecific Pairs
 Male Species: GFML v. Not ML2.583 (1.314, 5.079)1.610 (1.166, 2.222)
 Male Species: GPML v. Not ML1.165 (0.604, 2.247)1.039 (0.731, 1.478)
Random InterceptsBinomial Logistic Mixed Effects Estimated SDCox Proportional Hazard Mixed Effects Estimated SD
Male ID1.4350.714
  1. Binomial logistic mixed effects regression analysis of courtship success odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals and the estimated standard deviations of random intercepts are reported for males. Cox proportional hazard mixed effects hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals and the estimated standard deviations of random intercepts for males. Hazard ratios are interpreted as the relative courtship rate at a time t of one group as compared to another. For example, at any point in the trial, G. firmus males are 1.610 more likely to start courting with a heterospecific females with a male-like (ML) CHC profile then females with any other CHC profile