Fig. 2: Mismatch between the quality of male nuptial secretion and female gustatory preferences causes short nuptial feeding bouts and lower mating success in GA females.

a Dose-feeding response curves for WT and GA females in response to WT male nuptial secretion represented in male-equivalents (n = 20 for each). None of the females responded to water (0 male-equivalents, black circle), the vehicle used for nuptial secretion. The EC₅₀ values (95% CI) (male equivalents (eq.)) were 0.021 (0.015, 0.027) for WT females and 0.026 (0.018, 0.033) for GA females. b Consumption of the WT male nuptial secretion by WT and GA females in a single feeding bout (mean ± SE, n = 10 each). The asterisk indicates a significant difference (t = 4.56, P = 0.0002). c Pairing of GA females with intact WT males (Control, n = 20) and with WT males whose nuptial secretion was augmented with blue dye (B, n = 25) or blue dye and fructose (BF, n = 20) (mean ± SE). The addition of fructose to the tergal gland reservoirs of WT males significantly increased their mating success (χ²₍₂₎ = 13.23, P < 0.001). GA females engaged in longer nuptial feeding bouts (nuptial feeding duration) (ANOVA, Tukey’s HSD test, F_{(2, 16)} = 23.96, P < 0.0001). Different letters indicate significant differences among treatments.