Male reproductive success and intrasexual selection in the common lizard determined by DNA-microsatellites

Journal of Herpetology

Volumn 40, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 1-6

  Hofmann, Sylvia ^a   Henle, Klaus ^b  

^a MARTIN LUTHER UNIVERSITY HALLE WITTENBERG   (Germany)

^b HELMHOLTZ CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH UFZ   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

LACERTIDAE; SQUAMATA; ZOOTOCA VIVIPARA;

EID: 33645763876     PISSN: 00221511     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1670/58-05A.1     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. ANDERSSON, M. 1994. Sexual Selection. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
2. AVERY, R. A. 1975. Clutch size and reproductive effort in the lizard Lacerta vivipara Jacquin. Oecologia 19:165-170.
3. BARBADILLO, L. J., AND D. BAUWENS. 1997. Sexual dimorphism of tail length in lacertid lizards: test of a morphological constraint hypothesis. Journal of Zoology 242:473-482.
4. BARBADILLO, L. J., D. BAUWENS, F. BARAHONA, AND M. J. SANCHEZ-HERRAIZ. 1995. Sexual differences in caudal morphology and its relation to tail autotomy in lacertid lizards. Journal of Zoology 236:83-93.
5. BAUWENS, D., AND R. F. VERHEYEN. 1985. The timing of reproduction in the lizard Lacerta vivipara differences between individual females. Journal of Herpetology 19:353-364.
6. BOUDJEMADI, K., O. MARTIN, J. C. SIMON, AND A. ESTOUP. 1999. Development and cross-species comparison of microsatellite markers in two lizard species, Lacerta vivipara and Podarcis muralis. Molecular Ecology 8:513-525.
7. BULL, M. C. 2000. Monogamy in lizards. Behavioural Processes 51:1-3.
8. FERGUSON, G. W. 1970. Mating behaviour of the Side-Blotched Lizards of the genus Uta Sauria: Iguanidae. Animal Behaviour 18:65-72.
9. Fox, S. F., AND M. A. ROSTKER. 1982. Social cost of tail loss in Uta stansburiana. Science 218:692-693.
10. Fox, S. F., N. A. HEGER, AND L. S. DELAY. 1990. Social cost of tail loss in Uta stansburiana: lizard tails as status signalling badges. Animal Behaviour 39:549-554.
11. GARDNER M. G., C. M. BULL, S. J. B. COOPER, AND G. A. DUFFIELD. 2001. Genetic evidence for a family structure in stable social aggregations of the Australian lizard Egernia stokesii. Molecular Ecology 10:175-183.
12. GAULIN, S. J. C., AND R. W. FITZGERALD. 1986. Sex differences in spatial ability: an evolutionary hypothesis and test. American Naturalist 127:74-88.
13. _. 1989. Sexual selection for spatial-learning ability. Animal Behaviour 37:322-331.
14. GLANDT, D. 2001. Die Waldeidechse. Laurenti, Verlag Bochum, Bielefeld, Germany.
15. GULLBERG, A., M. OLSSON, AND H. TEGELSTRÖM. 1997. Male mating success, reproductive success and multiple paternity in a natural population of sand lizards - behavioural and molecular genetics data. Molecular Ecology 6:105-112.
16. HALLIDAY, T. R. 1992. Sexual selection in amphibians and reptiles: theoretical issues and new directions. In K. Adler (ed.), Contributions to Herpetology. Vol. 9, pp. 81-95. Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles, Oxford.
17. HALLIDAY, T. R., AND P. A. VERRELL. 1988. Body size and age in amphibians and reptiles. Journal of Herpetology 22:253-265.
18. HENLE, K. 1990. Population ecology and life history of three terrestrial geckos in arid Australia. Copeia 1990:761-781.
19. HERREL, A., R. VAN DAMME, B. VANHOOYDONCK, AND F. DE VREE. 2001. The implications of bite performance for diet in two species of lacertid lizards. Canadian Journal of Zoology 79:662-670.
20. HEULIN, B. 1988. Observations sur l'organisation de la reproduction et sur les comportements sexuels et agonisriques chez Lacerta vivipara. Vie et Milieu 38:177-187.
21. JAKOB, E. M., S. D. MARSHALL, AND G. W. UETZ. 1996. Estimating fitness a comparison of body condition indices. Oikos 77:61-67.
22. JENSSEN, T. A., K. S. ORRELL, AND M. B. LOVERN. 2000. Sexual dimorphisms in aggressive signal structure and use by a polygynous lizard, Anolis carolinensis. Copeia 2000:140-149.
23. LALOI, D., M. RICHARD, J. LECOMTE, M. MASSOT, AND J. CLOBERT. 2004. Multiple paternity in clutches of common lizard Lacerta vivipara: data from microsatellite markers. Molecular Ecology 13:719-723.
24. LEBAS, N. R. 2001. Microsatellite determination of male reproductive success in a natural population of the territorial Ornate Dragon Lizard, Ctenophorus ornatus. Molecular Ecology 10:193-203.
25. LEWIS, A. R., G. TIRADO, AND J. SEPULVEDA. 2000. Body size and paternity in a teiid lizard (Ameiva exsul). Journal of Herpetology 34:110-120.
26. MADSEN, T., R. SHINE, J. LOMAN, AND T. HÅKANSSON. 1993. Determinants of mating success in male adders, Vipera berus. Animal Behaviour 45:491-499.
27. MARSHALL, T. C., J. SLATE, L. E. B. KRUUK, AND J. M. PEMBERTON. 1998. Statistical confidence for likelihood-based paternity inference in natural populations. Molecular Ecology 7:639-655.
28. MARTIN, J., AND A. SALVADOR. 1997. Effects of tail loss on the time budgets, movements, and spacing patterns of Iberian Rock Lizards, Lacerta monticola. Herpetologica 53:117-125.
29. MORRISON, S. F., J. S. KEOGH, AND I. A. W. SCOTT. 2002. Molecular determination of paternity in a natural population of the multiple mating polygynous lizard Eulamprus heatwolei. Molecular Ecology 11:535-545.
30. O'CONNOR, D., AND R. SHINE. 2003. Lizards in "nuclear families": a novel reptilian social system in Egernia saxatilis (Scincidae). Molecular Ecology 12:743-752.
31. OLSSON, M. 1993. Contest success and mate guarding in male sand lizards, Lacerta agilis. Animal Behaviour 46:410-412.
32. OLSSON, M., AND T. MADSEN. 1998. Sexual selection and sperm competition in reptiles. In T. R. Birkhead and A. P. Møller (eds.), Sperm Competition and Sexual Selection, pp. 503-577. Academic Press, Cambridge.
33. _. 2001. Promiscuity in Sand Lizards (Lacerta agilis) and Adder Snakes (Vipera berus): causes and consequences. Journal of Heredity 92:190-197.
34. OLSSON, M., AND R. SHINE. 1997. The limits to reproductive output offspring size versus number in the Sand Lizard (Lacerta agilis). American Naturalist 149:179-188.
35. OLSSON, M., R. SHINE, E. WAPSTRA, B. UJVARI, AND T. MADSEN. 2002. Sexual dimorphism in lizard body shape: the roles of sexual selection and fecundity selection. Evolution 56:1538-1542.
36. SALVADOR, A., J. MARTIN, P. LOPEZ, AND J. P. VEIGA. 1996. Long term effect of tail loss on home range size and access to females in male lizards (Psammodromus algirus). Copeia 1:208-209.
37. SCHUETT, G. W. 1997. Body size and agonistic experience affect dominance and mating success in male copperheads. Animal Behaviour 54:213-224.
38. SCHWAGMEYER, P. L. 1988. Scramble-competition polygyny in an asocial mammal: male mobility and mating success. American Naturalist 131:885-892.
39. ŠMAJDA, B., AND I. MAJLÁTH. 1999. Variability of some morphological traits of the common lizard (Lacerta vivipara) in Slovakia. Biologia, Bratislava 54:585-589.
40. SPRITZER, M. D. 2003. Spatial Ability, Dominance Rank, and Sexual Selection among Meadow Voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus). Unpubl. Ph.D. diss., Miami University, Miami, OH.
41. TRIVERS, R. L. 1972. Parental investment and sexual selection. In B. Campbell (ed.), Sexual Selection and the Descent of Man, pp. 136-179, Aldine Publishing, Chicago.
42. VITT, L. J., J. D. CONGDON, AND N. A. DICKSON. 1977. Adaptive strategies and energetics of tail autotomy in lizards. Ecology 58:326-337.
43. WEATHERHEAD, P. J., M. R. PROSSER, H. L. GIBBS, AND G. P. BROWN. 2002. Male reproductive success and sexual selection in northern water snakes determined by microsatellite DNA analysis. Behavioral Ecology 13:808-815.