Greenlaw and Post • SALTMARSH SPARROW SEXUAL BEHAVIOR 
257 
TABLE I. Frequencies of social interactions and outcomes of intersexual encounters in Saltmarsh Sparrows in 
New York. 
All interactions' Inlersexual outcomes (M-F)“ 
Platform (Yr) 
location 
n 
M-M 
M-F 
F-F 
Unknown 
n 
Male mounts 
(Fs) 
Male 
thwarted 1 ' 
Female 
solicited' 
Unknown 
JO (77) 
372 
160 
157 
0 
55 
25 
6 (6) 
16 
1 
2 
03 (77) 
396 
124 
202 
0 
70 
17 
8(8) 
5 
1 
3 
Y-2 (77) 
183 
57 
99 
0 
27 
0 
- 
- 
- 
- 
Y-l (77) 
20 
9 
6 
0 
5 
0 
- 
- 
- 
- 
10(78) 
145 
78 
67 
0 
0 
9 
5 (5) 
2 
0 
2 d 
NO (78) 
149 
84 
62 
0 
3 
23 
8 |7) 
12 
0 
3 
OBM/WGM 
[1581 
[21 
96 
36 (34) 
48 
5 
7 
Totals 
1.265 
512 
593 
0 
160 
170 
63 (60) 
83 
7 
17 
Percent 
100.0 
40.5 
46.9 
0.0 
12.6 
100.0 
37.1 
48.8 
4.1 
10.0 
:i Frequencies in the left panel are based only on local area (limed) samples from platform blinds in 1977 and 1978 at Oak Beach Marsh tOBMl. and observations 
in the right panel describe outcomes of well-observed cases of male (Ml - female (Ft interactions on OBM and West Gilgo Marsh iWGMl. AJ libitum samples () in 
the left panel are shown to represent the two female-female interactions witnessed on OBM. but these data are not included in the two end rows of the panel. ‘All 
interactions' refen to the total number of agonistic and social encounters detected in each social category The frequencies in the right panel are based on all 
observations regardless of source (platform or ad libitum samples on the marshes). Male-lemalc interactions include single and multiple male meetings w ith a single 
female. ' Inlersexual outcomes' arc results of witnessed male-female interactions in well-observed cases. Number of instances of post-copulatory flight singing (Fs) 
by the male after a female was successfully subdued is in parentheses. 
b Other males interfered in the mounting attempt, or female successfully fended male off. 
1 Actual frequency of solicited copulations is underestimated by the observed frequency reported here. 
'' Male Seaside Sparrow (A. imiritimus) interfered and disrupted the interaction in these two cases 
these groups were passive ‘watchers’ of the 
mounting effort. We found only males in 18 
cases where we identified individuals in the 
watcher group. Females in 37 of 63 well-observed 
cases of successful mountings pursued the male 
briefly while uttering Tuc calls as he departed. At 
other times, the female disappeared silently into 
the grass. Males typically grasped the female’s 
head leathers during forced mountings. Attempted 
mountings by males occurred without any pre¬ 
liminary visual display. Females resisted male 
mounting attempts except in instances when they 
solicited. Overall, females successfully thwarted 
males in 57% of 146 pounce cases (Table 1). 
Threat postures or Tuc calls were sufficient to 
discourage the male in some instances. The female 
at times evaded the male and silently disappeared 
into the nearest cover and hid. The male withdrew 
silently in all well-observed mountings that were 
thwarted. In contrast, the male flight-sang as he 
departed in 95% of encounters in which he subdued 
and mounted the female. His departure behavior 
proved to be a reliable marker of successful 
suppression of female resistance to male mounting: 
post-copulatory flight-singing was not associated 
with female-solicited matings (// =7). Males at 
times also uttered a muted song while interacting 
with a resisting female (n - 12). Female resistance 
often appeared to be quite vigorous. Frequently, 
before the male was able to mount, the two tumbled 
on the ground, or flew up vertically, fighting 
breast-to-breast. These encounters were silent and 
lasted for 5-15 sec. The male usually pursued 
females that escaped, and the struggle resumed at 
another site. Males that successfully suppressed 
female resistance immediately assumed a copula- 
lory position on the female's back. At this stage of 
the interaction, the female typically crouched on 
the ground with lowered tail as the male mounted 
and grasped her head feathers. We have no 
evidence the passive female after a fight cooper¬ 
ated with the male during aggressive mountings by 
raising her tail and exposing her cloaca. 
We observed only seven female-solicited sex¬ 
ual encounters with males. One female copulated 
with at least two males and another female 
copulated with at least three different males. The 
others were observed on one occasion with one 
male. This low number reflected our protocol of 
making only opportunistic observations of fe¬ 
males building new nests as we checked nest 
status or walked in the vicinity of nests. Male- 
female intercepts and pounces were conspicuous, 
and female soliciting behavior was inconspicuous; 
thus, we believe our observations under-represent 
the frequency of female sexual solicitation. We 
observed pounce interactions almost daily during 
our study at Oak Beach, perhaps reflecting the 
