a) Bertram et al. wanted to answer whether male field crickets exhibit nonrandom mate preference. They also wanted to determine whether male mate choice was consistent. They hypothesized that mate preference of males was associated with male traits (weight, size, signaling) or with female morphological traits (size, weight, etc.). Specifically, they predicted that males would choose larger and heavier females, as it is possibly linked to female fecundity.
b) The study consisted of both virgin male (n=114) and female, lab-reared G. assimilis male field crickets. As juveniles, they were exposed to social cues in a communal environment with consistent food, water, and temperatures. Once the juvenile crickets were adults, they were housed in isolation. The crickets could not see each other, but females could hear the male crickets. All other adult housing conditions were identical to the juvenile conditions. One week after adulthood, Bertram et al. began collecting data on male acoustic signaling for 7-13 days. Specifically, quantifying the amount of time spent signaling and seven fine-scale characteristics of acoustic signaling behavior. After 14 days into adulthood, male mate preference for two randomly selected females of the same age was …show more content…
This information is important for understanding whether cricket virginity affected the results. Additionally, it was not explained why the researchers wanted the crickets to be virgins. Since crickets in the wild are not all virgins, this research design would have poor external validity. Further, since crickets were raised in isolation in a lab, the data from this experiment is extremely artificial, likely confounding the data. It would have been helpful if the research design included a control group, perhaps comparing lab-raised crickets to wild