ArticleEcology and evolution2025
Crickets in Context: How Environment and Morph Relate to Locomotory Behavior.
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Crickets in Context: How Environment and Morph Relate to Locomotory Behavior.Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
One challenge faced by animal behavior researchers is that behavior observed and studied in captivity may not reflect behavior in nature, but rarely are both contexts assessed. Pacific field crickets encounter an acoustically hunting lethal parasitoid fly in Hawaii, which has facilitated the rise of novel male morphs, like "purring," that sing attenuated songs and are protected from the fly. Yet these novel morphs are still able to reproduce. It is possible that the quieter purring males use an alternative mating tactic like increased locomotory behavior to facilitate encountering mates. Using a population that contains purring males and typical ancestral males, we asked if the two types differ in their locomotory behavior in the wild, whether this result is maintained in the lab, and whether behavior depends on context (varying the test substrate: natural grass or artificial). In the wild, the two male morphs did not differ in the time spent walking on the grass, but ancestral males spent more time under the grass. In the lab, the two morphs spent the same amount of time moving but traveled significantly further and faster on the artificial substrate than on the grass. Unlike in the field, morphs did not differ in movement under the grass in the lab, which is interesting as crickets are subject to parasitism in the field and may be protected under the grass. Our findings highlight the value of pairing lab experiments with field observations to fully understand animal behavior.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.