Do longer genital spines in male seed beetles function as better anchors during mating?

Animal Behaviour

Volumn 83, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 75-79

  Rönn, Johanna L ^a   Hotzy, Cosima ^b  

^a STOCKHOLM UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b UPPSALA UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Adaptive harm hypothesis; Callosobruchus; Fitness; Genital spine; Male male competition; Mating duration; Pleiotropic harm hypothesis; Postmating sexual selection; Sexual conflict

Indexed keywords

ANCHOR; BEETLE; DECADAL VARIATION; FITNESS; LIFE HISTORY TRAIT; REPRODUCTIVE COST; REPRODUCTIVE STRATEGY;

BRUCHINAE; CALLOSOBRUCHUS; COLEOPTERA;

EID: 83555176211     PISSN: 00033472     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2011.10.007     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Arnqvist G. Comparative evidence for the evolution of genitalia by sexual selection. Nature 1998, 393:784-786.
2. Arnqvist G., Rowe L. Sexual Conflict 2005, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.
3. Birkhead T.R., Møller A.P. Sperm Competition and Sexual Selection 1998, Academic Press, London.
4. Birkhead T.R., Pizzari T. Postcopulatory sexual selection. Nature 2002, 3:262-273.
5. Blanckenhorn W.U., Hosken D.J., Martin O.Y., Reim C., Teuschl Y., Ward P.I. The costs of copulating in the dung fly Sepsis cynipsea. Behavioral Ecology 2002, 13:353-358.
6. Crudgington, H.S. 2001. Sexual conflict in the bean weevil, Callosobruchus maculatus. Ph.D. thesis, University of Sheffield.
7. Crudgington H.S., Siva-Jothy M.T. Genital damage, kicking and early death. Nature 2000, 407:855-856.
8. Dowling D.K., Friberg U., Arnqvist G. A comparison of nuclear and cytoplasmic genetic effects on sperm competitiveness and female remating in a seed beetle. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 2007, 20:2113-2125.
9. Eady P. Intraspecific variation in sperm precedence in the bruchid beetle Callosobruchus maculatus. Ecological Entomology 1994, 19:11-16.
10. Eady P. Why do male Callosobruchus maculatus beetles inseminate so many sperm?. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 1995, 36:25-32.
11. Eady P., Hamilton L., Lyons R.E. Copulation, genital damage and early death in Callosobruchus maculatus. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 2007, 274:247-252.
12. Eberhard W.G. Sexual Selection and Animal Genitalia 1985, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
13. Eberhard W.G. Female Control: Sexual Selection by Cryptic Female Choice 1996, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.
14. Eberhard W.G. Female roles in sperm competition. Sperm Competition and Sexual Selection 1998, 91-116. Academic Press, London. T.R. Birkhead, A.P. Møller (Eds.).
15. Edvardsson M., Canal D. The effects of copulation duration in the Bruchid beetle Callosobruchus maculatus. Behavioral Ecology 2006, 17:430-434.
16. Edvardsson M., Tregenza T. Why do male Callosobruchus maculatus harm their mates?. Behavioral Ecology 2005, 16:788-793.
17. Gage M. Influences of sex, size and symmetry on ejaculate expenditure in a moth. Behavioral Ecology 1998, 9:592-597.
18. Gavrilets S. Rapid evolution of reproductive barriers driven by sexual conflict. Nature 2000, 403:886-889.
19. Gay L., Eady P., Vasudev R., Hosken D., Tregenza T. Costly sexual harassment in a beetle. Physiological Entomology 2009, 34:86-92.
20. von Helversen D., von Helversen O. Pre-mating sperm removal in the bushcricket Metaplastes ornatus Ramme 1931 (Orthoptera, Tettigonoidea, Phaneropteridae). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 1991, 28:391-396.
21. Hosken D., Stockley P. Sexual selection and genital evolution. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 2004, 19:87-93.
22. Hosken D., Price T. Genital evolution: the traumas of sex. Current Biology 2009, 19:519-521.
23. Hotzy C., Arnqvist G. Sperm competition favors harmful males in seed beetles. Current Biology 2009, 19:404-407.
24. Johnstone R.A., Keller L. How males can gain by harming their mates: sexual conflict, seminal toxins, and the cost of mating. American Naturalist 2000, 156:368-377.
25. Katvala M., Rönn J., Arnqvist G. Correlated evolution between male ejaculate allocation and female remating behaviour in seed beetles (Bruchidae). Journal of Evolutionary Biology 2008, 21:471-479.
26. Lessells C.M. Sexual conflict in animals. Levels of Selection in Evolution 1999, 75-99. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey. L. Keller (Ed.).
27. Lessells C.M. Why are males bad for females? Models for the evolution of damaging male mating behaviour. American Naturalist 2005, 165:46-63.
28. Martin O.Y., Hosken D.J. The evolution of reproductive isolation through sexual conflict. Nature 2003, 423:979-982.
29. Messina F.J., Slade A.F. Expression of a life-history trade-off in a seed beetle depends on environmental context. Physiological Entomology 1999, 24:358-363.
30. Michaels N.K. Mating conflicts and sperm competition in simultaneous hermaphrodites. Sperm Competition and Sexual Selection 1998, 219-254. Academic Press, London. T.R. Birkhead, A.P. Møller (Eds.).
31. Morrow E.H., Arnqvist G., Pitnick S. Adaptation versus pleiotropy: why do males harm their mates?. Behavioral Ecology 2003, 6:802-806.
32. Parker G.A. Sperm competition and its evolutionary consequences in the insects. Biological Reviews 1970, 45:525-567.
33. Parker G.A. Sexual selection and sexual conflict. Sexual Selection and Reproductive Competition in Insects 1979, 123-166. Academic Press, New York. M.S. Blum, N.A. Blum (Eds.).
34. Polak M., Rashed A. Microscale laser surgery reveals adaptive function of male intromittent genitalia. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 2010, 277:1371-1376.
35. Qi Y., Burkholder W.E. Sex pheromone biology and behaviour of the cowpea weevil Callosobruchus maculatus (Coleoptera: Bruchidae). Journal of Chemical Ecology 1982, 8:527-534.
36. Reinhardt K., Harry E., Naylor R., Gorb S., Siva-Jothy M.T. Female limited genital polymorphism in a traumatically inseminating insect. American Naturalist 2007, 170:931-935.
37. Rodriguez-Marquez I.A., Peretti A.V. Intersexual cooperation during male clasping of external female genitalia in the spider Physocyclus dugesi (Araneae, Pholcidae). Journal of Ethology 2010, 28:153-163.
38. Rönn J., Katvala M., Arnqvist G. The costs of mating and egg production in Callosobruchus seed beetles. Animal Behaviour 2006, 72:335-342.
39. Rönn J., Katvala M., Arnqvist G. Coevolution between harmful male genitalia and female resistance in seed beetles. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A. 2007, 104:10921-10925.
40. Rönn J., Katvala M., Arnqvist G. Interspecific variation in ejaculate allocation and associated effects on female fitness in seed beetles. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 2008, 21:461-470.
41. Rönn J., Katvala M., Arnqvist G. Correlated evolution between male and female primary reproductive characters in seed beetles. Functional Ecology 2011, 25:634-640.
42. Savalli U.M., Fox C.W. The effect of male size, age and mating behaviour on sexual selection in the seed beetle Callosobruchus maculatus. Ethology, Ecology and Evolution 1999, 11:49-60.
43. Savalli U.M., Czesak M., Fox C. Paternal investment in the seed beetle Callosobruchus maculatus (Coleoptera: Bruchidae): variation among populations. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 2000, 93:1173-1178.
44. Simmons L.W. Sperm Competition and its Evolutionary Consequences in the Insects 2001, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.
45. Southgate B.J. Biology of the Bruchidae. Annual Review of Entomology 1979, 24:449-473.
46. Tufton, T. 1993. The cost of reproduction in Callosobruchus maculatus. Ph.D. thesis. University of Sheffield.
47. Wedell N. Sperm protection and mate assessment in the bushcricket Coptaspis sp. 2. Animal Behaviour 1998, 56:357-363.
48. Wedell N., Cook P.A. Butterflies tailor their ejaculate in response to sperm competition risk and intensity. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 1999, 266:1033-1039.
49. Wedell N., Gage M., Parker G. Sperm competition, male prudence and sperm-limited females. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 2002, 17:313-320.
50. Wightman J.A. The ecology of Callosobruchus analis (Coleoptera Bruchine): energetics and energy reserves of the adults. Journal of Animal Ecology 1978, 47:131-142.