How does it work?
From the females perspective
Sexual cannibalism where a female kills and consumes the opposing courting male, is a representation of an extreme form of sexual conflict, and has been proposed as a mechanism used for mate choice. A theory outlined in a study by (Prenter et al' 2006) suggested cannibalism of the male was largely size-dependent, with mate choice of smaller males succumbing to pre-mating sexual cannibalism. Thus conclusions were made that mate choice by the female operated on absolute male size rather than displays of courtship.
Another theory of cannibalism choice by the female in mantises suggests the consumption of the male is purely a selection of diet, often when food limitations are present, or when the female mantis had been starved under laboratory conditions (Barry et al' 2008) (Hurd et al' 1994). A study by (Hurd et al' 1994) suggests the male mantises were most frequently chosen in the diet of female mantises during oogenesis, when food limitations are often at their greatest. Even after copulation had taken place and the male had escaped, female mantises are still found to attract males after first mating, increasing the chances of male deaths as inter sexual encounters rise (Hurd et al' 1994). This theory ultimately suggests female mantises continue to attract and cannibalize males beyond their need for sperm as a strategy to alleviate food limitations that occur during oogenesis (Hurd et al' 1994).
The final hypothesis that suggests why females cannibalize males after, before or during copulation is the paternal investment hypothesis, otherwise known as the adaptive suicide hypothesis (Hurd et al' 1994) (Suttle 1999). This hypothesis suggests males sacrifice themselves to significantly increase the quality and/or quantity of his offspring, suggesting sexual cannibalism in this species could be an adaptive strategy. Therefore this model predicts sexual cannibalism will be favored by natural selection when cannibalism significantly increases the number or viability of eggs fertilized by the cannibalized males sperm, especially when the number of mating's over a males life time is typically low (Suttle 1999). This theory is still rejected by many scientists, largely due to the fact that this model can only apply in situations where cannibalism occurs after a successful sperm transfer. This theory is also rejected by scientists due to the behavioral traits of males when attempting copulation, who have been witnessed to avoid cannibalization as outlined in the males perspective section (Kynaston et al' 1994).
The perspective from the females side on sexual cannibalism is still debatable, what drives the female to allow copulation to take place (mate choice, phenotypic size etc) and the drivers that cause the female to cannibalize her male partner (starvation, mate size, fecundity etc) are all possible drivers for this behavioral act, that is largely determined by the female.
Another theory of cannibalism choice by the female in mantises suggests the consumption of the male is purely a selection of diet, often when food limitations are present, or when the female mantis had been starved under laboratory conditions (Barry et al' 2008) (Hurd et al' 1994). A study by (Hurd et al' 1994) suggests the male mantises were most frequently chosen in the diet of female mantises during oogenesis, when food limitations are often at their greatest. Even after copulation had taken place and the male had escaped, female mantises are still found to attract males after first mating, increasing the chances of male deaths as inter sexual encounters rise (Hurd et al' 1994). This theory ultimately suggests female mantises continue to attract and cannibalize males beyond their need for sperm as a strategy to alleviate food limitations that occur during oogenesis (Hurd et al' 1994).
The final hypothesis that suggests why females cannibalize males after, before or during copulation is the paternal investment hypothesis, otherwise known as the adaptive suicide hypothesis (Hurd et al' 1994) (Suttle 1999). This hypothesis suggests males sacrifice themselves to significantly increase the quality and/or quantity of his offspring, suggesting sexual cannibalism in this species could be an adaptive strategy. Therefore this model predicts sexual cannibalism will be favored by natural selection when cannibalism significantly increases the number or viability of eggs fertilized by the cannibalized males sperm, especially when the number of mating's over a males life time is typically low (Suttle 1999). This theory is still rejected by many scientists, largely due to the fact that this model can only apply in situations where cannibalism occurs after a successful sperm transfer. This theory is also rejected by scientists due to the behavioral traits of males when attempting copulation, who have been witnessed to avoid cannibalization as outlined in the males perspective section (Kynaston et al' 1994).
The perspective from the females side on sexual cannibalism is still debatable, what drives the female to allow copulation to take place (mate choice, phenotypic size etc) and the drivers that cause the female to cannibalize her male partner (starvation, mate size, fecundity etc) are all possible drivers for this behavioral act, that is largely determined by the female.