240 
Psyche 
[Vol. 94 
Finally, field experience tells us that individual lacewings are mod- 
erately dispersed rather than tightly clumped in space, so that rarely 
if ever will two males be present to compete for the privilege of 
mating with a receptive female. For that matter, even in the labora- 
tory under conditions designed to encourage such competition, 
males never interfere with and barely even notice one another’s 
courtship activities. As a consequence, we feel it likely that repro- 
ductive success is reasonably egalitarian among healthy males, des- 
pite their potential as individuals for high sperm production and 
multiple copulations. Thus, the intensity of sexual selection is little 
different for males than for females of Chrysoperla of the carnea- 
group, for reasons first clearly outlined in Emlen and Oring’s impor- 
tant review (1977) of environmental influences on mating systems. 
Sexual dimorphism, which is coupled to the degree of asymmetry of 
sexual selection, is minimal in these species, as expected from the 
above argument (although see Hafernik et al. [1986] for a discussion 
of sexual dimorphism without sexual selection). 
General Conclusions. 
The same basic patterns of reproductive biology characterize all 
the green lacewings of this study. In the future, sexually dimorphic 
taxa should be studied; here, we have concentrated on a sexually 
monomorphic genus, Chrysoperla. In this genus, lifetime fecundity 
is high and reasonably equivalent in several common species. 
Polygamy of both males and females is the rule, although females 
can fertilize most of their eggs with sperm acquired from one copu- 
lation. Sexual receptivity mediates re-mating in females, and is only 
redovered when stored sperm is nearly depleted or otherwise un- 
available. The time between matings varies greatly with the success 
of insemination; because sperm must be almost used up by egg- 
laying before re-mating occurs, one is forced to the conclusion that 
males transfer variable quantities of sperm to different females. The 
causes of such variability in a given male are unknown, since the 
success of insemination shows no reliable correlations with either 
the number of previous matings or the duration of copulation. 
Potential for lifetime reproduction is much higher for males than for 
females because males can produce nearly unlimited quantities of 
sperm, but this potential probably goes unrealized in nature, 
because males have no reliable way of finding the few sexually 
