Explosive eversion and functional morphology of the duck penis supports sexual conflict in waterfowl genitalia

Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

Volumn 277, Issue 1686, 2010, Pages 1309-1314

  Brennan, Patricia L R ^a   Clark, Christopher J ^a   Prum, Richard O ^a  

^a YALE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Hydrostatic skeleton; Penis functional morphology; Sexual conflict

Indexed keywords

COEVOLUTION; COPULATION; FUNCTIONAL MORPHOLOGY; HISTOLOGY; HYPOTHESIS TESTING; SEXUAL CONFLICT; WATERFOWL;

ANATIDAE; AVES; CAIRINA MOSCHATA;

EID: 77952279375     PISSN: 09628452     EISSN: 14712970     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2009.2139     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Arnqvist, G. & Rowe, L. 2002 Antagonistic coevolution between the sexes in a group of insects. Nature 415, 787-789. (doi:10.1038/415787a)
2. Babinski, M. A., deBrito-Gitirana, L., Chagas, M. A., Abidú-Figueiredo, M., Costa, W. S. & Sampaio, F. J. B. 2005 Immunohistochemical analysis of smooth muscle cells and volumetric density of the elastic system fibers of wild boar (Sus scrofa) penis. An. Reprod. Sci. 86, 317-328. (doi:10.1016/j.anireprosci.2004.08.002)
3. Brennan, P. L. R., Prum, R. O., McCracken, K. G., Sorenson, M. D., Wilson, R. E. & Birkhead, T. R. 2007 Coevolution of male and female genital morphology in waterfowl. PLoS ONE 2, e418. (doi:10.1371/journal. pone.0000418)
4. Briskie, J. V. & Montgomerie, R. 1997 Sexual selection and the intromittent organ of birds. J. Av. Biol. 28, 73-86. (doi: 10.2307/3677097)
5. Chapman, T., Arnqvist, G., Bangham, J. & Rowe, L. 2003 Sexual conflict. Trends Ecol. Evol. 18, 41-48. (doi: 10. 1016/S0169-5347(02)00004-6)
6. Coker, C. R., McKinney, F., Hays, H., Briggs, S. & Cheng, K. 2002 Intromittent organ morphology and testis size in relation to mating system in waterfowl. Auk 119, 403-413. (doi: 10.1642/0004-8038(2002) 119 [0403:IOMATS]2.0.CO;2)
7. Cordero, C. & Eberhard, W. G. 2003 Female choice of sexually antagonistic male adaptations: a critical review of some current research. J. Evol. Biol. 16, 1-6. (doi:10. 1046/J.1420-9101.2003.00506.x)
8. Davis, J. D. & Jackson, C. G. 1970 Copulatory behavior in the red-eared turtle Pseudemys scripta elegans. Herpetologica 26, 238-240.
9. Dewsbury, D. A. 1975 Diversity and adaptation in rodent copulatory behavior. Science 190, 947-954. (doi: 10. 1126/science.1188377)
10. Gerhardt, U. 1933 Kloake und Begattungsorgane. In Hanbuch der vergleichenden Anatomie der Wirbeltiere (eds L. Bolk, E. Goppert, E. Kallius & W. Lubosch), pp. 37-54. Berlin, Germany: Urban and Schwarzenberg.
11. Hosken, D. & Stockley, P. 2004 Sexual selection and genital evolution. Trends Ecol. Evol. 19, 87-93. (doi:10.1016/j. tree.2003.11.012)
12. Kelly, D. A. 1997 Axial orthogonal fiber reinforcement in the penis of the nine-banded armadillo (Dasypus novemcinctus). J. Morph. 233, 249-255. (doi: 10.1002/(SICI) 1097-4687(199709)233:3<249::AID-JMOR4>3.0.CO;2-Z)
13. Kelly, D. A. 2002 The functional morphology of penile erection: tissue designs for increasing and maintaining stiffness. Int Comp. Biol. 42, 216-221. (doi:10.1093/icb/42.2.216)
14. Kelly, D. A. 2004 Turtle and mammal penis designs are anatomically convergent. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 271, S293-S295. (doi:10.1098/rsbl.2004.0161)
15. King, A. S. 1981 Phallus. In Form and function in birds (eds A. S. King & J. McLelland), pp. 107-148. New York, NY: Academic Press.
16. Koehl, M. A. R., Quillin, K. J. & Pell, C. A. 2000 Mechanical design of fiber-wound hydraulic skeletons: The stiffening and straightening of embryonic nothocords. Am. Zool. 40, 28-41. (doi:10.1668/0003-1569(2000) 040[0028:MDOFWH]2.0.CO;2)
17. Lorenz, K. 1971 Comparative studies of the motor patterns of the Anatinae 1941. Studies in animal and human behavior, pp. 14-114. London, UK: Harvard University Press. [Translation by Martin R. Methuen.]
18. McKinney, F. 1992 Courtship, pair fomation and signal systems. In Ecology and management of breeding waterfowl (ed. B. D. J. Batt), pp. 214-250. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
19. McKinney, F. & Evarts, S. 1998 Sexual coercion in waterfowl and other birds. In Avian reproductive tactics: female and male perspectives (eds P. G. Parker & N. Tyler Burley), pp. 163-195. Washington, DC: American Ornithologist Union.
20. McKinney, F., Derrickson, S. R. & Mineau, P. 1983 Forced copulation in waterfowl. Behavior 86, 250-294. (doi: 10. 1163/156853983X00390)
21. Morrow, E. H. & Arnqvist, G. 2003 Costly traumatic insemination and a female counter-adaptation in bed bugs. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 270, 2377-2381. (doi:10.1098/ rspb.2003.2514)
22. Parker, G. A. 1979 Sexual selection and sexual conflict. In Sexual selection and reproductive competition in insects (eds M. S. Blum & N. B. Blum), pp. 123-166. New York, NY: Academic Press.
23. Parker, G. A. 2006 Sexual conflict over mating and fertilization: an overview. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 361, 235. (doi: 10. 1098/rstb.2005.1785)
24. Rohwer, F. C. & Anderson, M. G. 1988 Female-biased philopatry, monogamy, and the timing of pair formation in migratory waterfowl. Curr. Ornith. 5, 187-221.
25. Sellier, N., Brun, J., Richard, M., Batellier, F., Dupuy, V. & Brillard, J. 2005 Comparison of fertility and embryo mortality following artificial insemination of common duck females (Anas platyrhynchos) with semen form muscovy (Cairina moschata) drakes. Theriogenology 64, 429-439. (doi:10.1016/j.theriogenology.2004.12.010)
26. Shimada, K. & Asai, I. 1978 Uterine contraction during the ovulatory cycle of the hen. Biol. Reprod. 19, 1057-1062. (doi:10.1095/biolreprod19.5.1057)
27. Sorenson, L. & Derrickson, D. E. 1994 Sexual selection in the northern pintail Anas acuta: The importance of female choice versus male-male competition in the evolution of sexually selected traits. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 35, 389-400. (doi:10.1007/BF00165841)
28. Wolgemuth, C. W., Inclan, Y. F., Quan, J., Mukherjee, S., Oster, G. & Koehl, M. A. R. 2005 How to make a spiral bacterium. Phys. Biol. 2, 189-199. (doi:10.1088/ 1478-3975/2/3/006)