1983] 
Johnson — Claeoderes hivinata 
145 
Despite their mating successes, the small males were not the equal 
of the large ones. The copulations of the small males appeared to 
require the absence or inattention of the larger attendant. In con- 
trast, the large males mated when they chose. All 6 large males, for 
instance, were the last to mate before the female oviposited, after 
which they left. 
Discussion 
In Claeoderes hivittata, there is a great deal of variation in adult 
size, presumably due in part to variable growth conditions expe- 
rienced by the larvae (Kleine 1933; Haedo Rossi 1961 ; Galford 1974; 
Peters and Barbosa 1977). As with another brentid, Brentus ancho- 
rago (Johnson 1982), the larger individuals have several reproduc- 
tive advantages. In both species, larger females can clear from the 
region in which they just oviposited, more of their drilling rivals 
(thus possibly reducing later crowding of their larvae), and are less 
likely to be ousted from their chosen drilling site. Larger females 
also lay larger eggs, an initial advantage which in other beetles has 
been shown to significantly affect final adult size (Palmer 1983). 
Larger males do more mating than average, and assortatively mate 
with larger females who have the reproductive advantage of larger 
eggs and greater competitive success at oviposition sites. 
There is, however, a principal difference between B. anchorago 
and C hivittata. In B. anchorago, the bigger the male, the more he 
mates (Johnson 1982). In C. hivittata, the middle-sized males mate 
the least. In B. anehorago, males are highly intolerant of other males 
at a drilling female. In C. hivittata, a female can sometimes have 
two attendants if one is large and one is small. 
The circumstances that permit the co-occurrence of a large and 
small male at one female need further investigation. In a proximal 
sense, small males may be less easily perceived than larger ones. 
Certainly, the small males appeared to assist this process by making 
themselves less conspicuous. They frequently tucked their snout 
under the female, along with the antennae which in other encounters 
permit male-male recognition. The small males were not seen to 
advertise their presence by initiating acts of aggression. Similar 
unprovocative tactics were noted in the smallest males of the wood- 
boring weevil, Rhinostomus harhirostris, at females guarded by 
large males (Eberhard 1980). Then too in the ultimate sense, it may 
