Sperm competition games: Optimal sperm allocation in response to the size of competing ejaculates

Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

Volumn 274, Issue 1607, 2007, Pages 209-217

  Engqvist, Leif ^a   Reinhold, Klaus ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BONN   (Germany)

^b BIELEFELD UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

Ejaculate size; Genetic algorithm; Sexual selection; Sneaker; Sperm competition intensity; Strategic sperm allocation

Indexed keywords

GENETIC ALGORITHM; MATING BEHAVIOR; SEXUAL SELECTION; SNEAK COPULATION; SPAWNING; SPERM COMPETITION;

ANIMAL CELL; ARTICLE; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; GENETIC ALGORITHM; MATING; MODEL; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SEXUAL SELECTION; SPAWNING; SPERM; SPERM COMPETITION; ANIMAL; CHEMISTRY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; GENETIC SELECTION; MALE; PHYSIOLOGY; SEXUAL BEHAVIOR; SPERMATOZOON; THEORETICAL MODEL;

ANIMALS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; MALE; MODELS, THEORETICAL; SELECTION (GENETICS); SEMEN; SEXUAL BEHAVIOR, ANIMAL; SPERMATOZOA;

EID: 39049185114     PISSN: 09628452     EISSN: 14712970     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2006.3722     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Birkhead, T. R. & Møller, A. P. (eds) 1998 Sperm competition and sexual selection. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
2. Cook, P. A. & Gage, M. J. G. 1995 Effects of risks of sperm competition on the numbers of eupyrene and apyrene sperm ejaculated by the moth Plodia interpunctella (Lepidoptera, Pyralidae). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 36, 261-268.
3. Cook, P. A., Harvey, I. F. & Parker, G. A. 1997 Predicting variation in sperm precedence. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 352, 771-780. (doi:10.1098/rstb.1997.0061)
4. Danielsson, I. 2001 Antagonistic pre- and post-copulatory sexual selection on male body size in a water strider (Gerris lacustris). Proc. R. Soc. B 268, 77-81. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2000.1332)
5. delBarco-Trillo, J. & Ferkin, M. H. 2006 Male meadow voles respond differently to risk and intensity of sperm competition. Behav. Ecol. 17, 581-585. (doi:10.1093/beheco/ark001)
6. Engqvist, L. & Reinhold, K. 2005 Pitfalls in experiments testing predictions from sperm competition theory. J. Evol. Biol. 18, 116-123. (doi:10.1111/j.1420-9101.2004.00792.x)
7. Engqvist, L. & Reinhold, K. 2006 Theoretical influence of female mating status and remating propensity on male sperm allocation patterns. J. Evol. Biol. 19, 1448-1458. (doi:10.1111/j.1420-9101.2006.01134.x)
8. Engqvist, L. & Sauer, K. P. 2001 Strategic male mating effort and cryptic male choice in a scorpionfly. Proc. R. Soc. B 268, 729-735. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2000.1423)
9. Engqvist, L. & Sauer, K. P. 2003 Determinants of sperm transfer in the scorpionfly Panorpa cognata: male variation, female condition and copulation duration. J. Evol. Biol. 16, 1196-1204. (doi:10.1046/j.1420-9101.2003.00613.x)
10. Fuller, R. C. 1998 Sperm competition affects male behaviour and sperm output in the rainbow darter. Proc. R. Soc. B 265, 2365-2371. (doi:10.1098/rspb.1998.0585)
11. Gage, A. R. & Barnard, C. J. 1996 Male crickets increase sperm number in relation to competition and female size. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 38, 349-353. (doi:10.1007/s002650050251)
12. Gross, M. R. 1996 Alternative reproductive strategies and tactics: diversity within sexes. Trends Ecol. Evol. 11, 263.
13. Holland, J. H. 1975 Adaptation in natural and artificial systems. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michican Press.
14. Maynard Smith, J. 1982 Evolution and the theory of games. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
15. Mitchell, M. & Taylor, C. E. 1999 Evolutionary computation: an overview. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 30, 593-616. (doi:10.1146/annurev. ecolsys.30.1.593)
16. Nakatsuru, K. & Kramer, D. L. 1982 Is sperm cheap? Limited male fertility and female choice in the Lemon tetra (Pisces, Characidae). Science 216, 753-755.
17. Olsson, M., Madsen, T. & Shine, R. 1997 Is sperm really so cheap? Costs of reproduction in male adders, Vipera berus. Proc. R. Soc. B 264, 455-459. (doi:10.1098/rspb.1997.0065)
18. Parker, G. A. 1970 Sperm competition and its evolutionary consequences in the insects. Biol. Rev. 45, 525-567.
19. Parker, G. A. 1990a Sperm competition games: raffles and roles. Proc. R. Soc. B 242, 120-126.
20. Parker, G. A. 1990b Sperm competition games: sneaks and extra-pair copulations. Proc. R. Soc. B 242, 127-133.
21. Parker, G. A. 1998 Sperm competition and the evolution of ejaculates: towards a theory base. In Sperm competition and sexual selection (ed. T. R. Birkhead & A. P. Møller), pp. 3-54. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
22. Parker, G. A., Ball, M. A., Stockley, P. & Gage, M. J. G. 1996 Sperm competition games: individual assessment of sperm competition intensity by group spawners. Proc. R. Soc. B 263, 1291-1297.
23. Parker, G. A., Ball, M. A., Stockley, P. & Gage, M. J. G. 1997 Sperm competition games: a prospective analysis of risk assessment. Proc. R. Soc. B 264, 1793-1802. (doi:10.1098/rspb.1997.0249)
24. Pilastro, A., Scaggiante, M. & Rasotto, M. B. 2002 Individual adjustment of sperm expenditure accords with sperm competition theory. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 99, 9913-9915. (doi:10.1073/pnas.152133499)
25. Pitnick, S. & Markow, T. A. 1994a Large-male advantages associated with costs of sperm production in Drosophila hydei, a species with giant sperm. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 91, 9277-9281. (doi:10.1073/pnas.91.20.9277)
26. Pitnick, S. & Markow, T. A. 1994b Male gametic strategies: sperm size, testes size, and the allocation of ejaculate among successive mates by the sperm-limited fly Drosophila pachea and its relatives. Am. Nat. 143, 785-819. (doi:10.1086/285633)
27. Pizzarri, T. K. C. C., Løvlie, H., Jakobsson, S. & Birkhead, T. B. 2003 Sophisticated sperm allocation in male fowl. Nature 426, 70-74. (doi:10.1038/nature02004)
28. Reinhold, K., Kurtz, J. & Engqvist, L. 2002 Cryptic male choice: sperm allocation strategies when female quality varies. J. Evol. Biol. 15, 201-209. (doi:10.1046/j.1420-9101.2002.00390.x)
29. Schaus, J. M. & Sakaluk, S. K. 2001 Ejaculate expenditures of male crickets in response to varying risk and intensity of sperm competition: not all species play games. Behav. Ecol. 12, 740-745. (doi:10.1093/beheco/12.6.740)
30. Schaus, J. M. & Sakaluk, S. K. 2002 Repeatability of sperm number across multiple matings in three cricket species, Gryllodes sigillatus, Gryllus veletis, and Gryllus texensis (Orthoptera: Gryllidae). Can. J. Zool. 80, 582-585. (doi:10.1139/z02-012)
31. Simmons, L. W. 2001 Sperm competition and its evolutionary consequences in the insects. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
32. Simmons, L. W. & Kvarnemo, C. 1997 Ejaculate expenditure by male bushcrickets decreases with sperm competition intensity. Proc. R. Soc. B 264, 1203-1208. (doi:10.1098/rspb.1997.0166)
33. Smith, C., Reichard, M. & Jurajda, P. 2003 Assessment of sperm competition by European bitterling, Rhodeus sericeus. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 53, 206-213. (doi:10.1007/s00265-002-0576-x)
34. Stockley, P. & Seal, N. J. 2001 Plasticity in reproductive effort of male dung flies (Scatophaga stercoraria) as a response to larval density. Funct. Ecol. 15, 96-102. (doi:10.1046/j.1365-2435.2001.00496.x)
35. Sumida, B. H., Houston, A. I., McNamara, J. M. & Hamilton, W. D. 1990 Genetic algorithms and evolution. J. Theor. Biol. 147, 59-84. (doi:10.1016/S0022-5193(05)80252-8)
36. Warner, R. R., Shapiro, D. Y., Marcanato, A. & Petersen, C. W. 1995 Sexual conflict - males with highest mating success convey the lowest fertilization benefits to females. Proc. R. Soc. B 262, 135-139.
37. Wedell, N. & Cook, P. A. 1998 Determinants of paternity in a butterfly. Proc. R. Soc. B 265, 625-630. (doi:10.1098/rspb.1998. 0340)
38. Wedell, N. & Cook, P. A. 1999a Butterflies tailor their ejaculate in response to sperm competition risk and intensity. Proc. R. Soc. B 266, 1033-1039. (doi:10.1098/rspb.1999.0740)
39. Wedell, N. & Cook, P. A. 1999b Strategic sperm allocation in the Small white butterfly Pieris rapae (Lepidoptera: Pieridae). Funct. Ecol. 13, 85-93. (doi:10.1046/j.1365-2435.1999.00286.x)
40. Wedell, N., Gage, M. J. G. & Parker, G. A. 2002 Sperm competition, male prudence and sperm-limited females. Trends Ecol. Evol. 17, 313-320. (doi:10.1016/S0169-5347(02)02533-8)
41. Zbinden, M., Largiader, C. R. & Bakker, T. C. M. 2004 Body size of virtual rivals affects ejaculate size in sticklebacks. Behav. Ecol. 15, 137-140. (doi:10.1093/beheco/arg110)