Literature DB >> 25546092

Sex allocation, juvenile mortality and the costs imposed by offspring on parents and siblings.

A T Kahn1, Michael D Jennions, Hanna Kokko.   

Abstract

Generally, sex-specific mortality is not expected to affect optimal patterns of sex allocation. Several authors have, however, made verbal arguments that this is not true if juvenile mortality is sex specific during the period of parental care. Here, we provide formal mathematical models exploring the effect of such mortality on optimal sex allocation. We confirm the prediction that biased production of the sex with higher mortality during care is favoured. Crucially, however, this is only true when juvenile mortality in the period of parental care frees up resources for their current/future siblings (i.e. the saved investment is transferable). Furthermore, we show that although optimal sex allocation is consistent with the theory of equal investment (as asserted by previous authors), thinking in terms of equal investment is not readily feasible in some scenarios. We also show that differences in early mortality overcome biased sex allocation such that the sex ratio at independence is generally, but not always, biased in the opposite direction from that at birth. Our models should prove useful to empiricists investigating the effect of sex-specific juvenile mortality and antagonistic sibling interactions on sex allocation.
© 2014 European Society For Evolutionary Biology. Journal of Evolutionary Biology © 2014 European Society For Evolutionary Biology.

Keywords:  competition; reproductive costs; sex ratio; sexual conflict; sexual selection

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25546092     DOI: 10.1111/jeb.12578

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Evol Biol        ISSN: 1010-061X            Impact factor:   2.411


  5 in total

Review 1.  Not all sex ratios are equal: the Fisher condition, parental care and sexual selection.

Authors:  Michael D Jennions; Lutz Fromhage
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2017-09-19       Impact factor: 6.237

2.  Does the lack of heritability of human sex ratios require a rethink of sex ratio theory? No: a Comment on Zietsch et al. 2020.

Authors:  Steven Hecht Orzack; Ian C W Hardy
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2021-03-24       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  A demographic model for sex ratio evolution and the effects of sex-biased offspring costs.

Authors:  Esther Shyu; Hal Caswell
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2016-02-09       Impact factor: 2.912

4.  Cascading effects of pre-adult survival on sexual selection.

Authors:  Hope Klug; Chelsea Langley; Elijah Reyes
Journal:  R Soc Open Sci       Date:  2022-04-13       Impact factor: 2.963

5.  Are human natal sex ratio differences across the world adaptive? A test of Fisher's principle.

Authors:  Mathieu Douhard; Stéphane Dray
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2021-03-17       Impact factor: 3.703

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.