104 
THE WILSON JOURNAL OF ORNITHOLOGY • Vol. 124. No. I. March 2012 
Anderson, D. R. 2008. Model based inference in the life 
sciences. Springer, New York, USA. 
Anderson, D. R„ K. P. Burnham, and W. L. Thompson. 
2000. Null hypothesis testing: problems, prevalence, 
and an alternative. Journal of Wildlife Management 
64:912-923. 
Arak, A. 1984. Sneaky breeders. Pages 154-194 in 
Producers and scroungers: strategies of exploitation 
and parasitism (C. J. Barnard. Editor). Croom Helm, 
Beckenham. United Kingdom. 
Ballard, W. B. and R. J. Robel. 1974. Reproductive 
importance of dominant male Greater Prairie Chick¬ 
ens. Auk 91:75-85. 
Boag, D. A. 1972. Effect of radio packages on behavior of 
captive Red Grouse. Journal of Wildlife Management 
36:511-518. 
Bradbury. J. W. and R. M. Gibson. 1983. LekS and mate 
choice. Pages 109-138 in Mate choice (P. Bateson. 
Editor). Cambridge University Press, New York, USA. 
Calenge, C. 2006. The package ADEHABITAT for the R 
software: a tool for the analysis of space and habitat 
use by animals. Ecological Modeling 197:516-519. 
Cooper, A. B. and J. .1. Millspaugii. 1999. The 
application of discrete choice models to wildlife 
resource selection studies. Ecology 80:566-575. 
Copelin, F. F. 1963. The Lesser Prairie Chicken in 
Oklahoma. Technical Bulletin Number 6. Oklahoma 
Wildlife Conservation Department, Oklahoma City, 
USA. 
Gibson, R. M. 1996. Female choice in Sage Grouse: the 
roles of attraction and active comparison. Behavioral 
Ecology and Sociobiology 39:55-59. 
Gibson. R. M, and J. W. Bradbury. 1985. Sexual 
selection in lekking Sage Grouse: phenotypic corre¬ 
lates of male mating success. Behavioral Ecology and 
Sociobiology 18:117-123. 
Gibson, R M.. J. W. Bradbury, and S. L. Vehrencamp. 
1991. Mate choice in lekking Sage Grouse revisited: 
the roles of vocal display, female site fidelity, and 
copying. Behavioral Ecology 2:165-180. 
Gratson. M. W. 1993. Sexual selection for increased male 
courtship and acoustic signals and against large male 
size at Sharp-tailed Grouse leks. Evolution 47:691- 
696. 
Gratson. M. W„ G. K. Gratson, and a. T. Blrgerud. 
1991. Male dominance and copulation disruption do 
not explain variance in male mating success on Sharp¬ 
tailed Grouse (Tympanuchus phasianellus) leks. Be¬ 
havior 118:187-213. 
Hagen, C. A. and K. M. GtESEN. 2005. Lesser Prairie- 
Chicken (Tympanuchus pallidicmctus). The birds of 
North America, Number 364. 
Hagen, C. a., J. C. Pitman. B, K. Sandercock, R. .1. 
Robel. and R. d. Applegate. 2005. Age-specific 
variation in apparent survival rates of male Lesser 
Prairie-Chickens. CondOr 107:78-86. 
Haukos. D. A. 1988. Reproductive ecology of Lesser 
Praine Chickens in West Texas. Thesis. Texas Tech 
University, Lubbock. USA. 
Haukos, D. A. and L. M. Smith. 1999. Effects of lek age on 
age structure and uttcndunce of Lesser Prairie-Chickens 
(Tympanuchus pallidicinctus). American Midland Nat¬ 
uralist 142:415-420. 
Haukos. D. A.. L. M. Smith, and G. S. Broim. 1990 
Spring trapping of Lesser Prairie Chickens. Journal of 
Field Ornithology 61:20-25. 
HOGI t nd, J. AND A. Lundberg. 1987. Sexual selection in j 
monomorphic lek-breeding bird: correlates of male 
mating success in the Great Snipe Gallinagn media. 
Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 21:211-216. 
HOGLLND. J. and R. V. ALATALO. 1995. Leks Pnncctnn 
University Press. Princeton, New Jersey. USA 
HOglund. J., T Johansson, and C. Pelabon. 1997. 
Behaviourally mediated sexual selection: charactcns- 
tics of successful male Black Grouse. Animal 
Behaviour 54:255-264. 
Hovi, M„ R. V. ALATALO, J. Hoclund. A. Lundblro. and 
P. T. Rintamaki. 1994. Lek centre attracts Black 
Grouse females. Proceedings of the Royal Society of 
London. Scries B 258:303-305. 
Kokko, H. and J. LiNDSTROM. 1997. Measuring the mating 
skew. American Naturalist 149:794-799. 
Kkltjt. J. P. and G. J. or Vos. 1988. Individual variation 
in reproductive success in male Black Grouse, Teinm 
tutrix 1. Pages 279—290 in Reproductive success (T. H 
Clutton-Brock. Editor). University of Chicago Press. 
Chicago, Illinois, USA. 
Landhl, II. F. 1989. A study of female and male mating 
behavior and female mate choice in ihc Sharp-tailed 
Grouse. Tympanuchus phasianellus jamesi. Disserta¬ 
tion. Purdue University. West Lafayette. USA. 
LeSMEISTBR. D. B.. M. E. GoMPPER. AND J. J. MlLLSPAtCH 
2008. Summer resting and den site selection by easlem 
spotted skunks (Spilogale putorius) in Arkansas. 
Journal of Mammalogy 89:1512-1520. 
McDonald, D. B 1989. Correlates of male mating success 
in a lekking bird with male-male cooperation. Animal 
Behaviour 37:1007-1022. 
NonaCS, P. 2(XK). Measuring and using skew in the study of 
social behavior and evolution. American Naturalist 
156:577-589. 
NONACS. P. 2003. Skew calculator 2003. University of 
California. Los Angeles. USA. http://www.eeb uda. 
cdu/Faculty/Nonacs/share vvare.htm 
Nooker. J. K AND B. K. Sandercock. 2008. Phenotypic 
correlates and survival consequences of male mating 
success in lek-mating Greater Prairie-Chickens (Tvm- 
panuclius cupido). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiol- 
ogy 62:1377-1388. 
Pettit, R. D. 1979. Effects of picloram and tehuthiuron 
pellets on sand shinnery oak communities. Journal of 
Range Management 32:196-200. 
R Development Core Team. 2008. R: a language and 
environment for statistical computing. R Foundation 
for Statistical Computing. Vienna. Austria. 
Reynolds. J. D. and M. R. Gross. 1990. Costs and 
benefits of female mate choice: is there a lek paradox" 
American Naturalist 136:230-243. 
Rintamaki. P. T„ R. V. Alatalo, J. HOglund. and A. 
LUNDBERG. 1995. Male territoriality and female 
choice on Black Grouse leks. Animal Behavior 
49:759-767. 
