Polyandry, sperm competition, and reproductive success in mice

Behavioral Ecology

Volumn 19, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 695-702

  Firman, Renée C ^a   Simmons, Leigh W ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA   (Australia)

Author keywords

Genetic incompatibility; Intrinsic sire effects; Multiple mating; Offspring viability; Paternity; Sperm size

Indexed keywords

EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; INCOMPATIBILITY; PATERNITY; POLYANDRY; REPRODUCTIVE SUCCESS; RODENT; SPERM COMPETITION;

MAMMALIA; MUS; MUS MUSCULUS;

EID: 47649113682     PISSN: 10452249     EISSN: 14657279     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/beheco/arm158     Document Type: Article

References (76)

1. Anderson MJ, Dixson AF. 2002. Motility and the midpiece in primates. Nature. 416:496.
2. Arnqvist G, Rowe L. 2005. Sexual conflict. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press.
3. Balshine S, Leach BJ, Neat F, Werner NY, Montgomerie R. 2001. Sperm size of African cichlids in relation to sperm competition. Behav Ecol. 12:726-731.
4. Bateman AJ. 1948. Intrasexual selection in Drosophila. Heredity. 2: 349-368.
5. Berteaux D, Bêty J, Rengifo E, Bergeron J. 1999. Multiple paternity in meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus): investigating the female role. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 45:283-291.
6. Birkhead TR, Møller AP. 1998. Sperm competition and sexual selection. London: Academic Press.
7. Blouin MS, Parsons M, Lacaille V, Lotz S. 1996. Use of microsatellite loci to classify individuals by relatedness. Mol Ecol. 5:393-401.
8. Briskie JV, Montgomerie R, Birkhead TR. 1997. The evolution of sperm size in birds. Evolution. 51:937-945.
9. Busser J, Zweep A, van Oortmerssen GA. 1974. Variability in the aggressive behaviour of Mus musculus domesticus, its possible role in population structure. In: van Abeelen JHF, editor. The genetics of behaviour. New York: Elsevier. (Frontiers of biology; vol. 38). p. 667-781.
10. Byrne PG, Simmons LW, Roberts JD. 2003. Sperm competition and the evolution of gamete morphology in frogs. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 270:2079-2086.
11. Champlin AK, Dorr DL, Gates AH. 1973. Determining the stage of the estrous cycle in the mouse by appearance of the vagina. Biol Reprod. 8:491-494.
12. Cohen J. 1988. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
13. Crawley MJ. 1993. Glim for ecologists. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications.
14. Daly M. 1978. The cost of mating. Am Nat. 112:771-774.
15. Dean MD, Ardlie KG, Nachman MW. 2006. The frequency of multiple paternity suggests that sperm competition is common in house mice (Mus domesticus). Mol Ecol. 15:4141-4151.
16. Dewsbury DA. 1984. Sperm competition in muroid rodents. In: Smith RL, editor. Sperm competition and the evolution of animal mating systems. London: Academic Press. p. 547-571.
17. Dewsbury DA. 1988. A test for the role of copulatory plugs in sperm competition in deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus). J Mammal. 69: 854-857.
18. Dietrich W, Katz H, Lincoln SE, Shin H, Friedman J, Dracopoli NC, Lander ES. 1992. A genetic map of the mouse suitable for typing intraspecific crosses. Genetics. 131:423-447.
19. Eberhard WG. 1996. Female control: sexual selection by cryptic female choice. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press.
20. Evans JP, Marshall DJ. 2005. Male-by-female interactions influence fertilisation success and mediate the benefits of polyandry in the sea urchin Heliocidaris erythrogramma. Evolution. 59:106-112.
21. Firman RC, Simmons LW. Forthcoming. Polyandry facilitates postcopulatory inbreeding avoidance in house mice. Evolution Int J Org Evolution. doi:10.111/j.15585646.2007.00307.x.
22. Fisher DO, Double MC, Blomberg SP, Jennions MD, Cockburn A. 2006. Post-mating sexual selection increases lifetime fitness of polyandrous females in the wild. Nature. 444:89-92.
23. Fisher DO, Double MC, Moore BD. 2006. Number of mates and timing of mating affect offspring growth in the small marsupial Antichinus agilis. Anim Behav. 71:289-297.
24. Gage MJG. 1994. Associations between body size, mating pattern, testis size and sperm lengths across butterflies. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 258:247-254.
25. Gage MJG, Morrow EH. 2003. Experimental evidence for the evolution of numerous, tiny sperm via sperm competition. Curr Biol. 13: 754-757.
26. García-González F, Simmons LW. 2005. The evolution of polyandry: intrinsic sire effects contribute to embryo viability. J Evol Biol. 18: 1097-1103.
27. García-González F, Simmons LW. 2007. Shorter sperm confer higher competitive fertilisation success. Evolution. 61:816-824.
28. Gomendio M, Harcourt AH, Roldan ERS. 1998. Sperm competition in mammals. In: Birkhead TR, Møller AP, editors. Sperm competition and sexual selection. London: Academic Press. p. 667-781.
29. Gomendio M, Roldan ERS. 1991. Sperm competition influences sperm size in mammals. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 243:181-185.
30. Harcourt AH, Harvey PH, Larson SG, Short RV. 1981. Testis weight, body weight and breeding system in primates. Nature. 293:55-57.
31. Holleley CE, Dickman CR, Crowther MS, Oldroyd P. 2006. Size breeds success: multiple paternity, multivariate selection and male semelparity in a small marsupial, Antechinus stuartii. Mol Ecol. 15: 3439-3448.
32. Hoogland JL. 1998. Why do female Gunnison's prairie dogs copulate with more than one male? Anim Behav. 55:351-359.
33. Hosken DJ, Garner TWJ, Tregenza T, Wedell N, Ward PI. 2003. Superior sperm competitors sire higher-quality young. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 270:1933-1938.
34. Huber MHR, Bronson FH, Desjardins C. 1980. Sexual activity of aged malemice: correlation with level of arousal, physical endurance, pathological status, and ejaculatory capacity. Biol Reprod. 23:305-316.
35. Jennions MD, Petrie M. 2000. Why do females mate multiply? A review of the genetic benefits. Biol Rev. 75:21-64.
36. Keil A, Sachser N. 1998. Reproductive benefits from female promiscuous mating in a small mammal. Ethology. 104:897-903.
37. Keller L, Reeve HK. 1995. Why do females mate with multiple males? The sexually selected sperm hypothesis. Adv Study Behav. 24: 291-315.
38. Kraaijeveld-Smit FJL, Ward SJ, Temple-Smith PD. 2002. Multiple paternity in a field population of a small carnivorous marsupial, the agile antechinus, Antechinus agilis. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 52:84-91.
39. Kraaijeveld-Smit FJL, Ward SJ, Temple-Smith PD, Paetkau D. 2002. Factors influencing paternity success in Antechinus agilis: last-male sperm precedence, timing of mating and genetic compatibility. J Evol Biol. 15:100-107.
40. LaMunyon CW, Ward S. 1999. Evolution of sperm size in nematodes: sperm competition favours larger sperm. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 266:263-267.
41. Larson JL, Miller DJ. 1999. Simple histochemical stain for acrosomes on sperm from several species. Mol Reprod Dev. 52:445-449.
42. Madsen T, Shine R, Loman J, Hakansson T. 1992. Why do female adders copulate so frequently? Nature. 335:440-441.
43. Malo AF, Garde JJ, Soler AJ, García AJ, Gomendio M, Roldan ERS. 2005. Male fertility in natural populations of red deer is determined by sperm velocity and the proportion of normal spermatozoa. Biol Reprod. 72:822-829.
44. Malo AF, Gomendio M, Garde J, Lang-Lenton B, Soler AJ, Roldan ERS. 2006. Sperm design and sperm function. Biol Lett. doi: 10.1098/rsbl.2006.0449.
45. Mardia KV, Kent JT, Bibby JM. 1979. Multivariate analysis. London: Academic Press.
46. Margulis SW. 1998. Differential effects of inbreeding at juvenile and adult life-history stages in Peromyscus polionotus. J Mammal. 79: 326-336.
47. Marshall TC, Slate J, Kruuk LEB, Pemberton JM. 1998. Statistical confidence for likelihood-based paternity inference in natural populations. Mol Ecol. 7:639-655.
48. Moller AP, Briskie JV. 1995. Extra-pair paternity, sperm competition and the evolution of testis size in birds. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 36: 357-365.
49. Murase T, Roldan ERS. 1996. Progesterone and the zona pellucida activate different transducing pathways in the sequence of events leading to diacylglycerol generation during mouse sperm acrosomal exocytosis. Biochem J. 320:1017-1023.
50. Nakagawa S. 2004. A farewell to Bonferroni: the problems of low statistical power and publication bias. Behav Ecol. 15:1044-1045.
51. Oakeshott JG. 1974. Social dominance, aggressiveness and mating success among male house mice (Mus musculus). Oecologia. 15: 143-158.
52. Parker G. 1970. Sperm competition and its evolutionary consequences in the insects. Biol Rev. 45:525-567.
53. Poiley SM. 1960. A systematic method of breeder rotation for noninbred laboratory animal colonies. Proc Anim Care Panel. 10:159-166.
54. Potts WK, Manning CJ, Wakeland EK. 1991. Mating patterns in seminatural populations if mice influenced by MHC genotype. Nature. 352:619-621.
55. Ramm SA, Parker GA, Stockley P. 2005. Sperm competition and the evolution of male reproductive anatomy in rodents. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 272:949-955.
56. Roberts SC, Gosling LM. 2003. Genetic similarity and quality interact in mate choice decisions by female mice. Nat Genet. 35:103-106.
57. Rolland C, Macdonald DW, de Fraipont M, Berdoy M. 2003. Free female choice in house mice: leaving best for last. Behaviour. 140:11-12.
58. Rugh R. 1968. The mouse: its reproduction and development. Minneapolis (MN): Burgess Publishing Company.
59. Schwagmeyer PL. 1985. Effects of multiple mating on reproduction in female thirteen-lined ground squirrels. Anim Behav. 34:297-298.
60. Simmons LW. 2001. Sperm competition and its evolutionary consequences in the insects. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press.
61. Simmons LW. 2005. The evolution of polyandry: sperm competition, sperm selection and offspring viability. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst. 36: 125-146.
62. Simmons LW, Kotiaho JK. 2007. Quantitative genetic correlation between trait and preference supports a sexually selected sperm process. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 104:16604-16608.
63. Smith RL, editor. 1984. Sperm competition and the evolution of animal mating systems. New York: Academic Press.
64. Smithson MJ. 2001. Scripts and software for noncentral confidence interval and power calculations [Internet]. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage. Available from: http://psychology.anu.edu.au/people/smithson/details/CIstuff/CI.html.
65. Stockley P. 2003. Female multiple mating behaviour, early reproductive failure and litter size variation in mammals. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 270:271-278.
66. Stockley P, Gage MJG, Parker GA, Moller AP. 1997. Sperm competition in fishes: the evolution of testis size and ejaculate characteristics. Am Nat. 149:933-954.
67. Tregenza T, Wedell N. 1998. Benefits of multiple mates in the cricket Gryllus biamaculatus. Evolution. 52:1726-1730.
68. Tregenza T, Wedell N. 2000. Genetic compatibility, mate choice and patterns of parentage: invited review. Mol Ecol. 9:1013-1027.
69. Tregenza T, Wedell N. 2002. Polyandrous females avoid costs of inbreeding. Nature. 415:71-73.
70. Trivers RL. 1972. Parental investment and sexual selection. In: Campbell R, editor. Sexual selection and the descent of man. London: Heinemann. p. 136-179.
71. Wolff JO, Dunlap AS. 2002. Multi-male mating, probability of conception, and litter size in the prairie vole (Microtus ochrogaster). Behav Processes. 58:105-110.
72. Yasui Y. 1997. A 'good sperm' model can explain the evolution of costly multiple mating by females. Am Nat. 149:573-584.
73. Yasui Y. 1998. The 'genetic benefits' of female multiple mating reconsidered. Trends Ecol Evol. 13:246-250.
74. Zeh JA, Zeh DW. 1996. The evolution of polyandry. I: intragenomic conflict and genetic incompatibility. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 263:1711-1717.
75. Zeh JA, Zeh DW. 1997. The evolution of polyandry. II: post-copulatory defences against genetic incompatibility. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 264:69-75.
76. Zeh JA, Zeh DW. 2001. Reproductive mode and the genetic benefits of polyandry. Anim Behav. 61:1051-1063.