18
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      No support for the sexy‐sperm hypothesis in the seed beetle: Sons of monandrous females fare better in post‐copulatory competition

      research-article
      1 ,
      Ecology and Evolution
      John Wiley and Sons Inc.
      paternity bias, polyandry, sexy‐sperm, sperm allocation, sperm competition

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The sexy‐sperm hypothesis posits that polyandrous females derive an indirect fitness benefit from multi‐male mating because they increase the probability their eggs are fertilized by males whose sperm have high fertilizing efficiency, which is assumed to be heritable and conferred on their sons. However, whether this process occurs is contentious because father‐to‐son heritability may be constrained by the genetic architecture underlying traits important in sperm competition within certain species. Previous empirical work has revealed such genetic constraints in the seed beetle, Callosobruchus maculatus, a model system in sperm competition studies in which female multi‐male mating is ubiquitous. Using the seed beetle, I tested a critical prediction of the sexy‐sperm hypothesis that polyandrous females produce sons that are on average more successful under sperm competition than sons from monandrous females. Contrary to the prediction of the sexy‐sperm hypothesis, I found that sons from monandrous females had significantly higher relative paternity in competitive double matings. Moreover, post hoc analyses revealed that these sons produced significantly larger ejaculates when second to mate, despite being smaller. This study is the first to provide empirical evidence for post‐copulatory processes favoring monandrous sons and discusses potential explanations for the unexpected bias in paternity.

          Related collections

          Most cited references64

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The adaptive significance of maternal effects

          T Mousseau (1998)
          Recently, the adaptive significance of maternal effects has been increasingly recognized. No longer are maternal effects relegated as simple `troublesome sources of environmental resemblance' that confound our ability to estimate accurately the genetic basis of traits of interest. Rather, it has become evident that many maternal effects have been shaped by the action of natural selection to act as a mechanism for adaptive phenotypic response to environmental heterogeneity. Consequently, maternal experience is translated into variation in offspring fitness.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Why do females mate multiply? A review of the genetic benefits.

            The aim of this review is to consider the potential benefits that females may gain from mating more than once in a single reproductive cycle. The relationship between non-genetic and genetic benefits is briefly explored. We suggest that multiple mating for purely non-genetic benefits is unlikely as it invariably leads to the possibility of genetic benefits as well. We begin by briefly reviewing the main models for genetic benefits to mate choice, and the supporting evidence that choice can increase offspring performance and the sexual attractiveness of sons. We then explain how multiple mating can elevate offspring fitness by increasing the number of potential sires that compete, when this occurs in conjunction with mechanisms of paternity biasing that function in copula or post-copulation. We begin by identifying cases where females use pre-copulatory cues to identify mates prior to remating. In the simplest case, females remate because they identify a superior mate and 'trade up' genetically. The main evidence for this process comes from extra-pair copulation in birds. Second, we note other cases where pre-copulatory cues may be less reliable and females mate with several males to promote post-copulatory mechanisms that bias paternity. Although a distinction is drawn between sperm competition and cryptic female choice, we point out that the genetic benefits to polyandry in terms of producing more viable or sexually attractive offspring do not depend on the exact mechanism that leads to biased paternity. Post-copulatory mechanisms of paternity biasing may: (1) reduce genetic incompatibility between male and female genetic contributions to offspring; (2) increase offspring viability if there is a positive correlation between traits favoured post-copulation and those that improve performance under natural selection; (3) increase the ability of sons to gain paternity when they mate with polyandrous females. A third possibility is that genetic diversity among offspring is directly favoured. This can be due to bet-hedging (due to mate assessment errors or temporal fluctuations in the environment), beneficial interactions between less related siblings or the opportunity to preferentially fertilise eggs with sperm of a specific genotype drawn from a range of stored sperm depending on prevailing environmental conditions. We use case studies from the social insects to provide some concrete examples of the role of genetic diversity among progeny in elevating fitness. We conclude that post-copulatory mechanisms provide a more reliable way of selecting a genetically compatible mate than pre-copulatory mate choice. Some of the best evidence for cryptic female choice by sperm selection is due to selection of more compatible sperm. Two future areas of research seem likely to be profitable. First, more experimental evidence is needed demonstrating that multiple mating increases offspring fitness via genetic gains. Second, the role of multiple mating in promoting assortative fertilization and increasing reproductive isolation between populations may help us to understand sympatric speciation.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Using observation-level random effects to model overdispersion in count data in ecology and evolution

              Overdispersion is common in models of count data in ecology and evolutionary biology, and can occur due to missing covariates, non-independent (aggregated) data, or an excess frequency of zeroes (zero-inflation). Accounting for overdispersion in such models is vital, as failing to do so can lead to biased parameter estimates, and false conclusions regarding hypotheses of interest. Observation-level random effects (OLRE), where each data point receives a unique level of a random effect that models the extra-Poisson variation present in the data, are commonly employed to cope with overdispersion in count data. However studies investigating the efficacy of observation-level random effects as a means to deal with overdispersion are scarce. Here I use simulations to show that in cases where overdispersion is caused by random extra-Poisson noise, or aggregation in the count data, observation-level random effects yield more accurate parameter estimates compared to when overdispersion is simply ignored. Conversely, OLRE fail to reduce bias in zero-inflated data, and in some cases increase bias at high levels of overdispersion. There was a positive relationship between the magnitude of overdispersion and the degree of bias in parameter estimates. Critically, the simulations reveal that failing to account for overdispersion in mixed models can erroneously inflate measures of explained variance (r 2), which may lead to researchers overestimating the predictive power of variables of interest. This work suggests use of observation-level random effects provides a simple and robust means to account for overdispersion in count data, but also that their ability to minimise bias is not uniform across all types of overdispersion and must be applied judiciously.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                khook@umd.edu
                Journal
                Ecol Evol
                Ecol Evol
                10.1002/(ISSN)2045-7758
                ECE3
                Ecology and Evolution
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                2045-7758
                31 October 2018
                December 2018
                : 8
                : 23 ( doiID: 10.1002/ece3.2018.8.issue-23 )
                : 11742-11753
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Department of Neurobiology and Behavior Cornell University Ithaca New York
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence

                Kristin A. Hook, Department of Biology, University of Maryland, College Park, College Park, MD.

                Email: khook@ 123456umd.edu

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5864-0316
                Article
                ECE34626
                10.1002/ece3.4626
                6303747
                8242b255-3062-4f6b-9ff4-8653eace9cfe
                © 2018 The Authors. Ecology and Evolution published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 04 September 2018
                : 18 September 2018
                Page count
                Figures: 4, Tables: 5, Pages: 12, Words: 10674
                Funding
                Funded by: Cornell University
                Funded by: Sigma Xi
                Funded by: American Museum of Natural History
                Funded by: National Science Foundation
                Award ID: DGE‐1144153
                Categories
                Original Research
                Original Research
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                ece34626
                December 2018
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_NLMPMC version:version=5.5.4 mode:remove_FC converted:22.12.2018

                Evolutionary Biology
                paternity bias,polyandry,sexy‐sperm,sperm allocation,sperm competition
                Evolutionary Biology
                paternity bias, polyandry, sexy‐sperm, sperm allocation, sperm competition

                Comments

                Comment on this article