Literature DB >> 15459878

Infertile matings and sperm competition: the effect of "nonsperm representation" on intraspecific variation in sperm precedence patterns.

Francisco Garcia-Gonzalez1.   

Abstract

In theoretical and experimental approaches to the study of sperm competition, it is often assumed that ejaculates always contain enough sperm of good quality and that they are successfully transferred and used for fertilization. However, this view neglects the potential effects of infertility and sperm limitation. Permanent or temporal male infertility due to male sterility, insemination failures, or failures to fertilize the ova implies that some males do not achieve sperm representation in the female reproductive tract after mating. A review of the literature suggests that rates of nonsperm representation may be high; values for the proportion of infertile matings across 30 insect species vary between 0% and 63%, with the median being 22%. I simulated P2 (the proportion of offspring fathered by the second male to copulate with a female in a double-mating trial) distributions under a mechanism of random sperm mixing when sample sizes and rates of male infertility varied. The results show that nonsperm representation can be responsible for high intraspecific variance in sperm precedence patterns and that it can generate misleading interpretations about the mechanism of sperm competition. Nonsperm representation might be a common obstacle in the studies of sperm competition and postcopulatory female choice.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15459878     DOI: 10.1086/423987

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am Nat        ISSN: 0003-0147            Impact factor:   3.926


  12 in total

1.  Mating portfolios: bet-hedging, sexual selection and female multiple mating.

Authors:  Francisco Garcia-Gonzalez; Yukio Yasui; Jonathan P Evans
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2015-01-07       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  Males mate with females even after sperm depletion in the two-spotted spider mite.

Authors:  Hisaho Kobayashi; Yukie Sato; Martijn Egas
Journal:  Exp Appl Acarol       Date:  2022-04-22       Impact factor: 2.132

3.  Experimental evidence that sperm maturation drives protandry in an ectotherm.

Authors:  Merel C Breedveld; Patrick S Fitze
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2016-06-03       Impact factor: 3.225

4.  Good genes and sexual selection in dung beetles (Onthophagus taurus): genetic variance in egg-to-adult and adult viability.

Authors:  Francisco Garcia-Gonzalez; Leigh W Simmons
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-01-18       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Highly variable sperm precedence in the stalk-eyed fly, Teleopsis dalmanni.

Authors:  Laura S Corley; Samuel Cotton; Ellen McConnell; Tracey Chapman; Kevin Fowler; Andrew Pomiankowski
Journal:  BMC Evol Biol       Date:  2006-06-26       Impact factor: 3.260

6.  Do the benefits of polyandry scale with outbreeding?

Authors:  Emily R Burdfield-Steel; Sam Auty; David M Shuker
Journal:  Behav Ecol       Date:  2015-07-01       Impact factor: 2.671

7.  The repeatability of mating failure in a polyandrous bug.

Authors:  E V Ginny Greenway; D M Shuker
Journal:  J Evol Biol       Date:  2015-07-06       Impact factor: 2.411

8.  Male-biased sex ratio does not promote increased sperm competitiveness in the seed beetle, Callosobruchus maculatus.

Authors:  Kathryn B McNamara; Stephen P Robinson; Márta E Rosa; Nadia S Sloan; Emile van Lieshout; Leigh W Simmons
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-06-16       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  When not to copy: female fruit flies use sophisticated public information to avoid mated males.

Authors:  Adeline Loyau; Simon Blanchet; Pauline Van Laere; Jean Clobert; Etienne Danchin
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2012-10-25       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 10.  Polyandry as a mediator of sexual selection before and after mating.

Authors:  Charlotta Kvarnemo; Leigh W Simmons
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2013-01-21       Impact factor: 6.237

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.