Papers

(18) Schrader M, Jarrett BJM, Rebar D, Kilner RM. Adaptation to a novel family environment involves both apparent and cryptic phenotypic changes. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, B in press.

(17) Kilmer JT, Fowler-Finn KD, Gray DA, Höbel G, Reichert MS,  Rebar D, Rodríguez RL. Describing mate preference functions and other function-valued traits. Journal of Evolutionary Biology doi: 10.1111/jeb.13122 pdf

(16) Jarrett BJM, Schrader M, Rebar D, Houslay T, Kilner RM. Cooperative interactions within the family enhance the capacity for evolutionary change in body size. Nature Ecology and Evolution 1: 0178. pdf

(15) Rebar D, Greenfield MD. 2017. When do acoustic cues matter? Perceived competition and reproductive plasticity over lifespan in a bushcricket. Animal Behaviour 128: 41-49. pdf

(14) Barbosa F, Rebar D, Greenfield MD. 2016. Female preference functions drive inter-population divergence in male signalling: call diversity in the bushcricket Ephippiger diurnusJournal of Evolutionary Biology 29: 2219-2228. pdf

(13) Rebar D, Rodríguez RL. 2016. Males adjust their signalling behaviour according to experience of male signals and male-female signal duets. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 29: 766-776. pdf

(12) Rebar D, Barbosa F, Greenfield MD. 2016. Acoustic experience influences male and female pre- and postcopulatory behaviors in a bushcricket. Behavioral Ecology 27: 434-443. pdf

(11) Barbosa F, Rebar D, Greenfield MD. 2016. Reproduction and immunity trade-offs constrain mating signals and nuptial gift size in a bushcricket. Behavioral Ecology 27: 109-117. pdf

(10) Rebar D, Rodríguez RL. 2015. Insect mating signal and mate preference phenotypes covary among host plant genotypes. Evolution 69: 602-610. pdf

(9) Rebar D, Rodríguez RL. 2014. Genetic variation in host plants contributes to variation in the mate preferences of a plant-feeding insect. The American Naturalist 184: 489-499. pdf

(8) Rebar D, Rodríguez RL. 2014. Trees to treehoppers: genetic variation in host plants contributes to variation in the mating signals of a plant-feeding insect. Ecology Letters 17: 203-210. pdf

(7) Rebar D, Rodríguez RL. 2013. Genetic variation in social influence on mate preferences. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, B 280: 20130803. pdf

(6) Rodríguez RL, Rebar D, Fowler-Finn KD. 2013. The evolution and evolutionary consequences of social plasticity in mate preferences. Animal Behaviour 85: 1041-1047. pdf

(5) Bailey NW, Fowler-Finn KD, Rebar D, Rodriguez RL. 2013. Green Symphonies or wind in the willows? Testing acoustic communication in plants. Behavioral Ecology 24: 797-798. pdf

(4) Rebar D, Höbel G, Rodríguez RL. 2012. Vibrational playback by means of airborne stimuli. Journal of Experimental Biology 215: 3513-3518. pdf

(3) Rebar D, Zuk M, Bailey NW. 2011. Mating experience in field crickets modifies pre- and postcopulatory female choice in parallel. Behavioral Ecology 22: 303-309. pdf

(2) Rebar D, Bailey NW, Zuk M. 2009. Courtship song’s role during female mate choice in the field cricket Teleogryllus oceanicus. Behavioral Ecology 20: 1307-1314. pdf

(1) Zuk M, Rebar D, Scott SP. 2008. Courtship song is more variable than calling song in the field cricket Teleogryllus oceanicus. Animal Behaviour 76: 1065-1071. pdf