Copulatory behaviour of the bank vole Myodes glareolus: Matings with one and two males do not make a difference

Acta Theriologica

Volumn 55, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 343-349

  Borkowska, Anetta ^a  

^a Institute of Biology   (Poland)

Author keywords

Allozymes; Bank vole; Copulatory behaviour; Multiple mating

Indexed keywords

ALLOZYME; COPULATION; LITTER SIZE; MULTIPLE MATING; REPRODUCTIVE SUCCESS; RODENT; SPERM COMPETITION;

CLETHRIONOMYS GLAREOLUS; MURIDAE;

EID: 78649246890     PISSN: 00017051     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4098/j.at.0001-7051.064.2010     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Adler N. T., Resko J. A. and Goy R. W. 1970. The effect of copulatory behaviour on hormonal change in the female rat prior to implantation. Physiology and Behavior 5: 1003-1007. doi: 10.1016/0031-9384(70)90155-1
2. Berteaux D., Bêty J., Rengifo E. and Bergeron J.-M. 1999. Multiple paternity in meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus): investigating the role of the female. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 45: 283-291. doi: 10. 1007/s002650050563
3. Birkhead T. R. and Møller A. P. 1998. Sperm competition and sexual selection. Academic Press, San Diego: 1-826. Borkowska A., Borowski Z. and Krysiuk K. 2009. Multiple paternity in free-living root voles. Behavioural Processes 82: 211-213. doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2009.05.003
4. delBarco-Trillo J. and Ferkin M. H. 2004. Male mammals respond to a risk of sperm competition conveyed by odours of conspecific males. Nature 431: 446-449. doi: 10.1038/nature02845
5. delBarco-Trillo J. and Ferkin M. H. 2007. Risk of sperm competition does not influence copulatory behavior in the promiscuous meadow vole (Microtus pennsylvanicus). Journal of Ethology 25: 139-145. doi: 10.1007/ s10164-006-0008-x
6. Dewsbury D. A. 1972. Patterns of copulatory behaviour in male mammals. Quarterly Review of Biology 47: 1-33. doi: 10.1086/407097
7. Elgar M. A., Champion de Crespigny F. E. and Ramamurthy S. 2003. Male copulatory behaviour and the risk of sperm competition. Animal Behaviour 66: 211-216. doi: 10.1006/anbe.2003.2189
8. Erskine M. S. 1989. Solicitation behavior in the estrous female rat: a review. Hormones and Behavior 23: 473-502. doi: 10.1016/0018-506X(89)90037-8
9. Ginsberg J. R. and Rubenstein D. I. 1990. Sperm competition and variation in zebra mating behaviour. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 26: 427-434. doi: 10.1007/BF00170901
10. Hoogland J. 1998. Why do female Gunnison's prairie dogs copulate with more than one male? Animal Behaviour 55: 351-359. doi: 10.1006/anbe.1997.0575
11. Horne T. J. and Ylönen H. 1996. Female bank voles (Clethrionomys glareolus) prefer dominant males; but what if there is no choice? Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 38: 401-405. doi: 10.1007/s002650050257
12. Huck U. W., Tonias B. A. and Lisk R. D. 1989. The effectiveness of competitive male inseminations in golden hamster, Mesocricetus auratus, depends on an interaction of mating order, time delay between males, and the time of mating relative to ovulation. Animal Behaviour 37: 674-680. doi: 10.1016/0003-3472(89)90046-8
13. Hunter F. M., Petrie M., Otronen M., Birkhead T. R. and Møller A. P. 1993. Why females copulate repeatedly with one male? Trends in Ecology and Evolution 8: 21-26. doi: 10.1016/0169-5347(93)90126-A
14. Ims R. A. 1987. Male spacing systems in Microtine rodents. The American Naturalist 130: 475-484. doi: 10.1086/ 284725
15. Jennions M. D. and Petrie M. 2000. Why do females mate multiply? A review of the genetic benefits. Biological Reviews 75: 21-64. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-185X.1999.tb00040.x
16. Klemme I., Eccard J. A. and Ylönen H. 2007. Why do female bank voles, Clethrionomys glareolus, mate multiply? Animal Behaviour 73: 623-628. doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav. 2006.07.010
17. Kozakiewicz M., Chołuj A. and Kozakiewicz A. 2007. Longdistance movements of individuals in a free-living bank vole population: an important element of male breeding strategy. Acta Theriologica 52: 339-348.
18. Kozakiewicz M., Chołuj A., Kozakiewicz A. and Sokół M. 2009. Familiarity and female choice in the bank vole - do females prefer strangers? Acta Theriologica 54: 157-164.
19. Kraaijeveld-Smit F. J. L., Ward S. J., Temple-Smith P. D. and Peatkau D. 2002. Factors influencing paternity success in Antechinus agilis: last-male sperm precedence, timing of mating and genetic compatibility. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 15: 100-107. doi: 10.1046/j.1420-9101.2002.00367.x
20. Kruczek M. 1997. Male rank and female choice in the bank vole, Clethrionomys glareolus. Behavioural Processes 40: 171-176. doi: 10.1016/S0376-6357(97)00785-7
21. Matthews M. and Adler N. T. 1977. Facilitative and inhibitory influences of reproductive behaviour on sperm transport in rats. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology 91: 727-741. doi: 10.1037/h0077364
22. Milligan S. R. 1979. The copulatory pattern of the bank vole (Clethrionomys glareolus) and speculation on the role of penile spines. Journal of Zoology 188: 279-283. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7998.1979.tb03405.x
23. Parker G. A. 1990. Sperm competition games: sneaks and extra-pair copulations. Proceedings of the Royal Society London B 242: 127-133. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1990.0115
24. Ratkiewicz M. and Borkowska A. 2000. Multiple paternity in the bank vole (Clethrionomys glareolus): field and experiment data. Mammalian Biology 65: 6-14.
25. Solomon N. G., Keane B., Knoch L. R. and Hogan P. J. 2004. Multiple paternity in socially monogamous prairie voles (Microtus ochrogaster). Canadian Journal of Zoology 82: 1667-1671. doi: 10.1139/z04-142
26. Stockley P. and Preston B. T. 2004. Sperm competition and diversity in rodent copulatory behaviour. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 17: 1048-1057. doi: 10.1111/j. 1420-9101.2004.00742.x
27. Toner J. P., Attas A. I. and Adler N. T. 1987. Transcervical sperm transport in the rat: the roles pre-ejaculatory behaviour and copulatory plug fit. Physiology and Behavior 39: 371-375. doi: 10.1016/0031-9384(87)90237-X