Changes in sperm quality and numbers in response to experimental manipulation of male social status and female attractiveness

American Naturalist

Volumn 170, Issue 5, 2007, Pages 758-770

  Cornwallis, Charlie K ^a,b   Birkhead, Tim R ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Ejaculate quality; Female ornamentation; Phenotypic plasticity; Sexual selection; Social status; Sperm competition

Indexed keywords

COPULATION; GAMEBIRD; HONEST SIGNALING; ORNAMENTATION; PHENOTYPIC PLASTICITY; REPRODUCTIVE STRATEGY; REPRODUCTIVE SUCCESS; SEXUAL SELECTION; SPERM COMPETITION; TRADE-OFF;

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; CHICKEN; COMB; FEMALE; HISTOLOGY; MALE; PHYSIOLOGY; SEXUAL SELECTION; SOCIAL DOMINANCE; SPERMATOZOON; SPERMATOZOON MOTILITY;

ANIMALS; CHICKENS; COMB AND WATTLES; FEMALE; MALE; MATING PREFERENCE, ANIMAL; SOCIAL DOMINANCE; SPERM MOTILITY; SPERMATOZOA;

GALLUS GALLUS;

EID: 35348893113     PISSN: 00030147     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1086/521955     Document Type: Article

References (94)

1. Ali, S., and S. D. Ripley. 1981. Handbook of the birds of India and Pakistan: together with those of Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan and Sri Lanka. Vol. 4. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
2. Allen, C. J., and L. R. Champion. 1955. Competitive fertilization in the fowl. Poultry Science 34:1332-1342.
3. Amundsen, T. 2000. Why are female birds ornamented? Trends in Ecology & Evolution 15:149-155.
4. Amundsen, T., and E. Forsgren. 2003. Male preference for colourful females affected by male size in a marine fish. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 54:55-64.
5. Andersson, M. 1994. Sexual selection. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
6. Andersson, M., and L. W. Simmons. 2006. Sexual selection and mate choice. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 21:296-302.
7. Bakst, M. R., and H. C. Cecil. 1997. Techniques for semen evaluation, semen storage, and fertility determination. Poultry Science Association, Savoy, IL.
8. Bateman, A. J. 1948. Intra-sexual selection in Drosophila. Heredity 2:349-368.
9. Bateson, P., ed. 1983. Mate choice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
10. Birkhead, T. R., and F. Fletcher. 1995. Depletion determines sperm numbers in male zebra finches. Animal Behaviour 48:451-456.
11. Birkhead, T. R., and A. P. Møller, eds. 1998. Sperm competition and sexual selection. Academic Press, London.
12. Birkhead, T. R., F. Fletcher, E. J. Pellatt, and A. Staples. 1995a. Ejaculate quality and the success of extra-pair copulations in the zebra finch. Nature 377:422-423.
13. Birkhead, T. R., G. J. Wishart, and J. D. Biggins. 1995b. Sperm precedence in the domestic fowl. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 261:285-292.
14. Bonduriansky, R. 2001. The evolution of male mate choice in insects: a synthesis of ideas and evidence. Biological Reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 76:305-339.
15. Burley, N. 1977. Parental investment, mate choice, and mate quality. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 74:3476-3479.
16. Byrne, P. G., and W. R. Rice. 2006. Evidence for adaptive male mate choice in the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 273:917-922.
17. Chenoweth, S. F., and M. W. Blows. 2003. Signal trait sexual dimorphism and mutual sexual selection in Drosophila serrata. Evolution 57:2326-2334.
18. Chenoweth, S. F., P. Doughty, and H. Kokko. 2006. Can non-directional male mating preferences facilitate honest female ornamentation? Ecology Letters 9:179-184.
19. Cloutier, S., and R. C. Newberry. 2000. Recent social experience, body weight and initial patterns of attack predict the social status attained by unfamiliar hens in a new group. Behaviour 137:705-726.
20. Clutton-Brock, T. H., S. D. Albon, R. M. Gibson, and F. E. Guinness. 1979. The logical stag: adaptive aspects of fighting in red deer (Cervus elaphus L.). Animal Behaviour 27:211-225.
21. Collias, N. E., and E. C. Collias. 1967. A field study of the red jungle fowl in north-central India. Condor 69:360-386.
22. _. 1996. Social organization of a red junglefowl, Gallus gallus, population related to evolutionary theory. Animal Behaviour 51:1337-1354.
23. Collias, N. E., E. Collias, and R. I. Jennrich. 1994. Dominant red junglefowl (Gallus gallus) hens in an unconfined flock rear the most young over their lifetime. Auk 111:863-872.
24. Cornwallis, C. K. 2004. The reproductive tactics of male and female fowl, Gallus gallus. PhD thesis. University of Sheffield.
25. Cornwallis, C. K., and T. R. Birkhead. 2006. Social status and availability of females determine patterns of sperm allocation in the fowl. Evolution 60:1486-1493.
26. _. 2007. Experimental evidence that female ornamentation increases the acquisition of sperm and signals fecundity. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 274:583-590.
27. Craig, J. V., L. L. Ortman, and A. M. Guhl. 1965. Genetic selection for social dominance ability in chicks. Animal Behaviour 13:114-131.
28. Darwin, C. 1871. The descent of man and selection in relation to sex. J. Murray, London.
29. de Reviers, M., and J. B. Williams. 1984. Testis development and production of spermatozoa in the cockerel (Gallus domesticus). Pages 183-202 in F. J. Cunningham, P. E. Lake, and D. Hewitt, eds. Reproductive biology of poultry. British Poultry Science, Harlow.
30. Dewsbury, D. A. 1982. Ejaculate cost and male choice. American Naturalist 119:601-610.
31. Domb, L. G., and M. Pagel. 2001. Sexual swellings advertise female quality in wild baboons. Nature 410:204-206.
32. Donoghue, A. M., D. R. Holsberger, D. P. Evenson, and D. P. Froman. 1998. Semen donor selection by in vitro sperm mobility increases fertility and semen storage in the turkey hen. Journal of Andrology 19:295-301.
33. Dziuk, P. J. 1996. Factors that influence the proportion of offspring sired by a male following heterospermic insemination. Animal Reproduction Science 43:65-88.
34. Eberhard, W. G. 1996. Female control: sexual selection by cryptic female choice. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
35. Engqvist, L., and K. Reinhold. 2006. Sperm competition games: optimal sperm allocation in response to the size of competing ejaculates. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 274:209-217.
36. Etches, R. J. 1996. Reproduction in poultry. CAB International, Oxford.
37. Evans, J. P., L. Zane, S. Francescato, and A. Pilastro. 2003. Directional postcopulatory sexual selection revealed by artificial insemination. Nature 421:360-363.
38. Fitzpatrick, J. L., J. K. Desjardins, K. A. Stiver, R. Montgomerie, and S. Balshine. 2006. Male reproductive suppression in the cooperatively breeding fish Neolamprologus pulcher. Behavioral Ecology 17:25-33.
39. Froman, D. P., and D. J. McLean. 1996. Objective measurement of sperm motility based upon sperm penetration of Accudenz. Poultry Science 75:776-784.
40. Froman, D. P., T. Pizzari, A. J. Feltmann, H. Castillo-Juarez, and T. R. Birkhead. 2002. Sperm mobility: mechanisms of fertilising efficiency, genetic variation and phenotypic relationship with male status in the fowl, Gallus g. domesticus. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 269:607-612.
41. Fujihara, N. 1992. Accessory reproductive fluids and organs in male domestic birds. World's Poultry Science Journal 48:39-56.
42. Gage, M. J. G., C. P. Macfarlane, S. Yeates, R. G. Ward, J. B. Searle, and G. A. Parker. 2004. Spermatozoal traits and sperm competition in Atlantic salmon: relative sperm velocity is the primary determinant of fertilization success. Current Biology 14:44-47.
43. Gosler, A. G., and D. Harper. 2000. Assessing the heritability of body condition in birds: a challenge exemplified by the great tit Parus major L. (Aves). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 71:103-117.
44. Grafen, A., and R. Hails. 2002. Modern statistics for the life sciences. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
45. Gross, M. R. 1996. Alternative reproductive strategies and tactics: diversity within sexes. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 11:92-98.
46. Harrison, B. 1987. Den Svenska dvärghönan. II. Svensk Rasfjäderfäförbundets Tidsskrift 1:12-14.
47. Johnsen, T. S., and M. Zuk. 1995. Testosterone and aggression in male red jungle fowl. Hormones and Behavior 29:593-598.
48. Johnstone, R. A., J. D. Reynolds, and J. C. Deutsch. 1996. Mutual mate choice and sex differences in choosiness. Evolution 50:1382-1391.
49. Joseph, N. S., F. E. Robinson, R. A. Renema, and K. A. Thorsteinson. 2003. Comb growth during sexual maturation in female broiler breeders. Journal of Applied Poultry Research 12:7-13.
50. Kilgallon, S. J., and L. W. Simmons. 2005. Image content influences men's semen quality. Biology Letters 1:253-255.
51. Kokko, H., and P. Monaghan. 2001. Predicting the direction of sexual selection. Ecology Letters 4:159-165.
52. Koyama, S., and S. Kamimura. 1999. Lowered sperm motility in subordinate social status of mice. Physiology and Behaviour 65:665-669.
53. Lebas, N. R., L. R. Hockham, and M. G. Ritchie. 2003. Nonlinear and correlational sexual selection on "honest" female ornamentation. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 270:2159-2165.
54. Littell, R. C., G. A. Milliken, W. W. Stroup, R. D. Wolfinger, and O. Schabenberger. 2006. SAS for mixed models. SAS Institute, Cary, NC.
55. Marconato, A., and D. Y. Shapiro. 1996. Sperm allocation, sperm production and fertilisation rates in the bucktooth parrotfish. Animal Behaviour 52:971-980.
56. Martin, P. A., T. J. Reimers, J. R. Lodge, and P. J. Dziuk. 1974. The effect of ratios and numbers of spermatozoa mixed from two males on the proportion of offspring. Journal of Reproduction and Fertility 39:251-258.
57. McBride, G., I. P. Parer, and F. Foenander. 1969. The social organisation and behaviour of the feral domestic fowl. Animal Behaviour Monographs 2:125-181.
58. McDowell, K. J., T. V. Little, P. J. Timoney, and M. H. Adams. 1996. Characterisation of proteins in the seminal plasma of stallions, geldings and geldings supplemented with testosterone. Research in Veterinary Science 61:33-37.
59. Nakatsuru, K., and D. L. Kramer. 1982. Is sperm cheap? limited male fertility and female choice in the lemon tetra (Pisces, Characidae). Science 216:753-755.
60. Neff, B. D., P. Fu, and M. R. Gross. 2003. Sperm investment and alternative mating tactics in bluegill sunfish (Lepomis macrochirus). Behavioral Ecology 14:634-641.
61. Nishida, T., W. Rerkamnuaychoke, D. G. Tung, S. Saignaleus, S. Okamoto, Y. Kawamoto, J. Kimura, et al. 2000. Morphological identification and ecology of the red jungle fowl in Thailand, Laos and Vietnam. Animal Science Journal 71:470-480.
62. Nishiyama, H. 1955. Studies on the accessory reproductive organs in the cock. Journal of the Faculty of Agriculture Kyushu University 10:277-305.
63. Parker, G. A. 1970. Sperm competition and its evolutionary consequences in the insects. Biological Reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 45:525-567.
64. _. 1979. Sexual selection and sexual conflict. Pages 123-166 in M. S. Blum and N. A. Blum, eds. Sexual selection and reproductive competition in insects. Academic Press, New York.
65. _. 1983. Mate quality and mating decisions. Pages 141-166 in P. Bateson, ed. Mate choice. Cambridge University Press, New York.
66. _. 1998. Sperm competition and the evolution of ejaculates: towards a theory base. Pages 3-54 in T. R. Birkhead and A. P. Møller, eds. Sperm competition and sexual selection. Academic Press, London.
67. Parker, J. E., F. F. McKenzie, and H. L. Kempster. 1940. Observations on the sexual behaviour of New Hampshire males. Poultry Science 19:191-197.
68. Parker, T. H., and D. Garant. 2004. Quantitative genetics of sexually dimorphic traits and capture of genetic variance by a sexually-selected condition-dependent ornament in red junglefowl (Gallus gallus). Journal of Evolutionary Biology 17:1277-1285.
69. Pattarini, J. M., W. T. Starmer, A. Bjork, and S. Pitnick. 2006. Mechanisms underlying the sperm quality advantage in Drosophila melanogaster. Evolution 60:2064-2080.
70. Pitnick, S. 1996. Investment in testes and the cost of making long sperm in Drosophila. American Naturalist 148:57-80.
71. Pizzari, T. 2003. Food, vigilance, and sperm: the role of male direct benefits in the evolution of female preference in a polygamous bird. Behavioral Ecology 14:593-601.
72. Pizzari, T., D. P. Froman, and T. R. Birkhead. 2002. Pre- and post-insemination episodes of sexual selection in the fowl. Heredity 89:112-116.
73. Pizzari, T., C. K. Cornwallis, H. Løvlie, S. Jakobsson, and T. R. Birkhead. 2003. Sophisticated sperm allocation in male fowl. Nature 426:70-74.
74. Pizzari, T., P. Jensen, and C. K. Cornwallis. 2004. A novel test of the phenotype-linked fertility hypothesis reveals independent components of fertility. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 271:51-58.
75. Pizzari, T., C. K. Cornwallis, and D. P. Froman. 2007. Social competitive ability associated with rapid fluctuations in sperm quality in male fowl. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 274:853-860.
76. Pound, N., and M. J. G. Gage. 2004. Prudent sperm allocation in Norway rats, Rattus norvegicus: a mammalian model of adaptive ejaculate adjustment. Animal Behaviour 68:819-823.
77. Preston, B. T., I. R. Stevenson, J. M. Pemberton, and K. Wilson. 2001. Dominant rams lose out by sperm depletion: a waning success in siring counters a ram's high score in competition for ewes. Nature 409:681-682.
78. Preston, B. T., I. R. Stevenson, and K. Wilson. 2003. Soay rams target reproductive activity towards promiscuous females' optimal insemination period. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 270:2073-2078.
79. Ptasek, M. B., and J. Travis. 1997. Male mate choice in the sailfin molly, Poecilia latipenna. Evolution 51:1217-1231.
80. Reinhold, K., J. Kurtz, and L. Engqvist. 2002. Cryptic male choice: sperm allocation strategies when female quality varies. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 15:201-209.
81. Roff, D. A. 1997. Evolutionary quantitative genetics. Chapman & Hall, New York.
82. Rubolini, D., P. Galeotti, G. Ferrari, M. Spairani, F. Bernini, and M. Fasola. 2006. Sperm allocation in relation to male traits, female size, and copulation behaviour in a freshwater crayfish species. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 60:212-219.
83. Rudolfsen, G., L. Figenschou, I. Folstad, H. Tveiten, and M. Figenschou. 2006. Rapid adjustments of spermcharacteristics in relation to social status. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 273:325-332.
84. Sæther, S. A., P. Fiske, and J. A. Kålås. 2001. Male mate choice, sexual conflict and strategic allocation of copulation in a lekking bird. Proceedings of Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 268:2097-2102.
85. Schütz, K. E., and P. Jensen. 2001. Effects of resource allocation on behavioural strategies: a comparison of red junglefowl (Gallus gallus) and two domesticated breeds of poultry. Ethology 107:753-765.
86. Simmons, L. W. 2001. Sperm competition and its evolutionary consequences in the insects. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
87. Snook, R. R. 2005. Sperm in competition: not playing by the numbers. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 20:46-53.
88. Trivers, R. L. 1972. Parental investment and sexual selection. Pages 136-179 in B. Campbell, ed. Sexual selection and the descent of man 1871-1971. Aldine-Atherton, Chicago.
89. Vladić, T. V., and T. Järvi. 2001. Sperm quality in the alternative reproductive tactics of Atlantic salmon: the importance of the loaded raffle mechanism. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 268:2375-2381.
90. Wedell, N., M. J. G. Gage, and G. A. Parker. 2002. Sperm competition, male prudence and sperm-limited females. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 17:313-320.
91. Wigby, S., and T. Chapman. 2004. Sperm competition. Current Biology 14:R100-R103.
92. Wishart, G. J., and F. H. Palmer. 1986. Correlation of the fertilising ability of semen from individual male fowls with sperm motility and ATP content. British Poultry Science 27:97-102.
93. Wolfinger, R., and M. O'Connell. 1993. Generalised linear mixed models: a pseudo-likelihood approach. Journal of Statistical Computation and Simulation 4:233-243.
94. Zamudio, K. R., and B. Sinervo. 2000. Polygyny, mate-guarding, and posthumous fertilization as alternative male mating strategies. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 97:14427-14432.