| Literature DB >> 26379364 |
Xiao-Wei Li1, Jozsef Fail2, Anthony M Shelton3.
Abstract
Although it is generally assumed that one or a few matings are sufficient to maximize female fitness and that mating is generally assumed to be costly to females, multiple matings of females have been reported across a wide and taxonomically diverse set of animals. Here, we investigated female mating frequency and male harassment rate in arrhenotokous Thrips tabaci. In addition, the cost to females of mating, multiple matings, and male harassment to females was evaluated. We found that T. tabaci females mated multiple times during their lifetime and were subjected to a high rate of male harassment at all the ages we tested. Mating was costly to females in terms of reducing longevity and delaying the initiation of egg laying, although mating did not affect the survivorship and longevity of males. Furthermore, continual exposure to males also resulted in a fitness cost to mated females in terms of delayed egg production and reduced fecundity. Virgin females of arrhenotokous thrips produce only male progeny whereas mated females of arrhenotokous thrips produce males from unfertilized eggs and females from fertilized eggs. However, multiple matings did not allow females to fertilize a larger proportion of their eggs to increase the female offspring ratio. Our study demonstrates the conflicts between the occurrence of multiple matings and the cost of sexual activities. This raises questions about the evolution of multiple matings and polyandry in this species. Furthermore, these findings suggest that such phenomena may occur in other animal species and influence the evolution of their mating systems.Entities:
Keywords: Arrhenotokous Thrips tabaci; Female mating frequency; Fitness cost; Male harassment
Year: 2015 PMID: 26379364 PMCID: PMC4562005 DOI: 10.1007/s00265-015-1970-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Behav Ecol Sociobiol ISSN: 0340-5443 Impact factor: 2.980
Bivariate Pearson’s correlation matrix of male harassment rates and female mating frequencies
| Male harassment rate | Female mating frequency | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male harassment rate | First 10 days | Entire 30 days | First 10 days | Entire 30 days | |
| First 10 days | Pearson’s r | 1 | 0.944 | −0.565 | −0.243 |
| P | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.147 | ||
| Entire 30 days | Pearson’s r | 0.944 | 1 | −0.587 | −0.290 |
| P | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.082 | ||
| Female mating frequency | |||||
| First 10 days | Pearson’s | −0.565 | −0.587 | 1 | 0.652 |
|
| 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.001 | ||
| Entire 30 days | Pearson’s | −0.243 | −0.290 | 0.652 | 1 |
|
| 0.147 | 0.082 | 0.001 | ||
Number of tested individuals N = 37
Bivariate Pearson’s correlation matrix of oviposition, longevity, fecundity, daily fecundity, and preoviposition period of Thrips tabaci females in 3 treatments (virgin, mated kept alone, mated with a male companion)
| Oviposition | Longevity | Fecundity | Daily fecundity | Preoviposition perioda | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oviposition | Pearson’s | 1 | 0.946 | 0.832 | 0.008 | 0.251 |
|
| 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.924 | 0.002 | ||
|
| 149 | 149 | 149 | 149 | 149 | |
| Longevity | Pearson’s | 0.946 | 1 | 0.781 | −0.108 | 0.012 |
|
| 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.190 | 0.880 | ||
|
| 149 | 160 | 160 | 149 | 149 | |
| Fecundity | Pearson’s | 0.832 | 0.781 | 1 | 0.477 | 0.351 |
|
| 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.001 | ||
|
| 149 | 160 | 160 | 149 | 149 | |
| Daily fecundity | Pearson’s | 0.008 | −0.108 | 0.477 | 1 | 0.317 |
|
| 0.924 | 0.190 | 0.001 | 0.001 | ||
|
| 149 | 149 | 149 | 149 | 149 | |
| Preoviposition perioda | Pearson’s | 0.251 | 0.012 | 0.351 | 0.317 | 1 |
|
| 0.002 | 0.880 | 0.001 | 0.001 | ||
|
| 149 | 149 | 149 | 149 | 169 | |
aStatistical analysis was carried out following inverse transformation
N number of replications
Fig. 1Accumulated percentage of re-mated females paired with a mated orvirgin male in Thrips tabaci
Accumulated female mating frequency and male harassment rate of a female paired with a single mated or virgin male during the first 10-day period and entire 30-day period
| Female mating frequency | Male harassment rate | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| First 10 days | Entire 30 days | First 10 days | Entire 30 days | |
| With virgin male | 1.44 ± 0.34 | 2.33 ± 0.68 | 21.6 ± 3.32 | 21.7 ± 2.70 |
| With mated male | 1.26 ± 0.33 | 2.32 ± 0.67 | 25.4 ± 3.24 | 24.6 ± 2.63 |
|
| 0.449 | 0.971 | 0.108 | 0.121 |
Estimated means (±95 % CI) calculated by a general linear model within a column were compared by t tests. Number of tested individuals is in brackets
Fig. 2Harassment rate of mated and virgin males toward Thrips tabaci females at different ages. Different letters indicate significant difference (t test, p < 0.05)
Female and male longevity, female preoviposition period, oviposition period, fecundity, and daily fecundity of virgin and mated Thrips tabaci
| Female longevity (days) | Male longevitya (days) | Preoviposition perioda (days) | Oviposition period (days) | Fecundity(eggs/female) | Daily fecundity | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Virgin | 40.1 ± 4.64 | 27.8 ± 7.43 | 3.4 ± 1.16 | 35.2 ± 4.60 | 115.7 ± 18.2 | 3.5 ± 0.35 |
| Mated | 36.5 ± 4.33 | 23.8 ± 4.51 | 5.5 ± 1.09 | 29.8 ± 4.29 | 101.1 ± 17.0 | 3.5 ± 0.33 |
|
| 0.043 | 0.964 | 0.00007 | 0.018 | 0.317 | 0.185 |
Estimated means (±95 % CI) calculated by a general linear model within a column were compared by Dunnett t tests. Number of tested individuals is in brackets
aMeans (±95 % CI) calculated from original data but statistical analysis was carried out following transformation, means were compared by t test
bLifetime fecundity divided by oviposition period
Fig. 3Survivorship of Thrips tabaci females and males in different treatments. a Females, b males
Longevity, preoviposition period, oviposition period, fecundity, daily fecundity, and total offspring sex ratios of mated Thrips tabaci with and without a male companion
| Longevity (days) | Preoviposition perioda (days) | Oviposition period (days) | Fecundity(eggs/female) | Daily fecundity | Female offspring ratioa (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without male | 36.5 ± 4.33 | 5.5 ± 1.09 | 29.8 ± 4.29 | 101.1 ± 17.0 | 3.5 ± 0.33 | 75.3 ± 4.55 |
| With male | 30.7 ± 4.71 | 8.5 ± 1.11 | 20.4 ± 4.66 | 63.9 ± 18.5 | 3.1 ± 0.35 | 69.0 ± 6.86 |
|
| 0.123 | 0.015 | 0.005 | 0.005 | 0.073 | 0.128 |
Estimated means (±95 % CI) calculated by a general linear model within a column were compared by Dunnett t tests. Number of tested individuals is in brackets
aMeans (±95 % CI) calculated from original data but statistical analysis was carried out following transformation, means were compared by t test
bLifetime fecundity divided by oviposition period