Signaler–receiver–eavesdropper: Risks and rewards of variation in the dominant frequency of male cricket calls

Signals are important for communication and mating, and while they can benefit an individual, they can also be costly and dangerous. Male field crickets call in order to attract female crickets, but gravid females of a parasitoid fly species, Ormia ochracea, are also attracted to the call and use it to pinpoint male cricket hosts. Conspicuousness of the call can vary with frequency, amplitude, and temporal features. Previous work with this system has only considered temporal variation in cricket calls, both large scale, that is, amount of calling and at what time of evening, and small scale, that is, aspects of chirp rate, pulse rate, and numbers of pulses per chirp. Because auditory perception in both crickets and flies relies on the matching of the peak frequency of the call with the peripheral sensory system, peak frequency may be subject to selection both from female crickets and from female flies. Here, we used field playbacks of four different versions of the same male Gryllus lineaticeps calling song that only differed in peak frequency (3.3, 4.3, 5.3, and 6.3 kHz) to test the relative attractiveness of the calls to female crickets and female flies. Our results clearly show that lower frequency calls enhance male safety from fly parasitism, but that the enhanced safety would come at a cost of reduced attraction of female crickets as potential mates. The results imply that eavesdropper pressure can disrupt the matched coevolution of signalers and receivers such that the common concept of matched male–female signaler–receiver coevolution may actually be better described as male–female–predator signaler–receiver–eavesdropper coevolution.