Estimating genetic benefits of polyandry from experimental studies: A meta-analysis

Biological Reviews

Volumn 87, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 1-33

  Slatyer, Rachel A ^a   Mautz, Brian S ^a   Backwell, Patricia R Y ^a   Jennions, Michael D ^a  

^a AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Female choice; Maternal effects; Meta analysis; Multiple mating; Paternal effects; Paternity; Polyandry; Sexual selection; Sperm competition

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; FEMALE; GENETICS; MALE; META ANALYSIS; PHYSIOLOGY; REPRODUCTION; REPRODUCTIVE FITNESS; REVIEW; SEXUAL BEHAVIOR;

ANIMALS; FEMALE; GENETIC FITNESS; MALE; REPRODUCTION; SEXUAL BEHAVIOR, ANIMAL;

AVES; HEXAPODA;

EID: 84855274013     PISSN: 14647931     EISSN: 1469185X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-185X.2011.00182.x     Document Type: Review

References (233)

1. Adler, M. (2010). Sexual conflict in waterfowl: why do females resist extrapair copulations? Behavioral Ecology 21, 182-192.
2. Agbali, M., Reichard, M., Bryjova, A., Bryja, J. & Smith, C. (2010). Mate choice for nonadditive genetic benefits correlate with MHC dissimilarity in the rose bitterling (Rhodeus ocellatus). Evolution 64, 1683-1696.
3. Akçay, E. & Roughgarden, J. (2007). Extra-pair paternity in birds: Review of the genetic benefits. Evolutionary Ecology Research 9, 855-868.
4. Albrecht, A., Kreisinger, J. & Pialek, J. (2006). The strength of direct selection against female promiscuity is associated with rates of extrapair fertilization in socially monogamous songbirds. American Naturalist 167, 739-744.
5. Arnqvist, G. & Kirkpatrick, M. (2005). The evolution of infidelity in socially monogamous passerines: The strength of direct and indirect selection on extrapair copulation behavior in females. American Naturalist 165, S26-S37.
6. Arnqvist, G. & Nilsson, T. (2000). The evolution of polyandry: Multiple mating and female fitness in insects. Animal Behaviour 60, 145-164.
7. Arnqvist, G., Nilsson, T. & Katvala, M. (2005). Mating rate and fitness in female bean weevils. Behavioral Ecology 16, 123-127.
8. Arnqvist, G. & Rowe, L. (2005). Sexual Conflict. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
9. Avise, J. C., Jones, A. G., Walker, D., Dewoody, J. A., Dakin, B., Fiumera, A., Fletcher, D., Mackiewicz, M., Pearse, D., Porter, B. & Wilkins, S. D. (2002). Genetic mating systems and reproductive natural histories of fishes: Lessons for ecology and evolution. Annual Review of Genetics 36, 19-45.
10. Baer, B., Armitage, S. A. O. & Boomsma, J. J. (2006). Sperm storage induces an immunity cost in ants. Nature 441, 872-875.
11. Baer, B. & Schmid-Hempel, P. (1999). Experimental variation in polyandry affects parasite loads and fitness in a bumble-bee. Nature 397, 151-154.
12. Baer, B. & Schmid-Hempel, P. (2001). Unexpected consequences of polyandry for parasitism and fitness in the bumblebee, Bombus terrestris. Evolution 55, 1639-1643.
13. Baer, B. & Schmid-Hempel, P. (2003). Bumblebee workers from different sire groups vary in susceptibility to parasite infection. Ecology Letters 6, 106-110.
14. Baker, R. H., Ashwell, R. I. S., Richards, T. A., Fowler, K., Chapman, T. & Pomiankowski, A. (2001). Effects of multiple mating and male eye span on female reproductive output in the stalk-eyed fly, Cyrtodiopsis dalmanni. Behavioral Ecology 12, 732-739.
15. Barber, I., Arnott, S. A., Braithwaite, V. A., Andrew, J. & Huntingford, F. A. (2001). Indirect fitness consequences of mate choice in sticklebacks: Offspring of brighter males grow slowly but resist parasitic infections. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 268, 71-76.
16. Begg, C. B. & Mazumdar, M. (1994). Operating characteristics of a bank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics 50, 1088-1101.
17. Bernasconi, G. & Keller, L. (2001). Female polyandry affects their sons' reproductive success in the red flour beetle Tribolium castaneum. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 14, 186-193.
18. Bezzerides, A. L., Iyengar, V. K. & Eisner, T. (2008). Female promiscuity does not lead to increased fertility or fecundity in an arctiid moth (Utetheisa ornatrix). Journal of Insect Behavior 21, 213-221.
19. Bilde, T., Foged, A., Schilling, N. & Arnqvist, G. (2009). Postmating sexual selection favors males that sire offspring with low fitness. Science 324, 1705-1706.
20. Bilde, T., Friberg, U., Maklakov, A. A., Fry, J. D. & Arnqvist, G. (2008). The genetic architecture of fitness in a seed beetle: assessing the potential for indirect genetic benefits of female choice. BMC Evolutionary Biology 8, 295.
21. Bilde, T., Maklakov, A. A. & Schilling, N. (2007). Inbreeding avoidance in spiders: Evidence for rescue effect in fecundity of female spiders with outbreeding opportunity. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 20, 1237-1242.
22. Birkhead, T. R., Hosken, D. J. & Pitcnick, S. (eds.). (2009). Sperm Biology: An Evolutionary Perspective, 1st edition. Academic Press, Burlington, M.A.
23. Birkhead, T. R. & Møller, A. P. (1998). Sperm Competition and Sexual Selection. Academic Press, London.
24. Bonduriansky, R. & Chenoweth, S. F. (2009). Intralocus sexual conflict. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 24, 280-288.
25. Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T. & Rothstein, H. R. (2009). Introduction to Meta-analysis. John Wiley & Sons, New York, U.S.A.
26. Boomsma, J. J. (2007). Kin selection versus sexual selection: Why the ends do not meet. Current Biology 17, R673-R783.
27. Boomsma, J. J. (2009). Lifetime monogamy and the evolution of eusociality Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B- Biological Sciences 364, 3191-3207.
28. Bourke, A. F. G. & Franks, N. R. (1991). Social Evolution in Ants. Princeton University Press, Princeton, U.S.A.
29. Bretman, A., Newcombe, D. & Tregenza, T. (2009). Promiscuous females avoid inbreeding by controlling sperm storage. Molecular Ecology 18, 3340-3345.
30. Bretman, A., Wedell, N. & Tregenza, T. (2004). Molecular evidence of post-copulatory inbreeding avoidance in the field cricket Gryllus bimaculatus. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 271, 159-164.
31. Brommer, J. E., Kirkpatrick, M., Qvarnström, A. & Gustafsson, L. (2007). The intersexual genetic correlation for lifetime fitness in the wild and its implications for sexual selection. PLoS ONE 2, e744.
32. Brouwer, L., Barr, I., Van De Pol, M., Burke, T., Komdeur, J. & Richardson, D. S. (2010). MHC-dependent survival in a wild population: evidence for hidden genetic benefits gained through extra-pair fertilizations. Molecular Ecology 19, 3444-3455.
33. Brown, W. D., Bjork, A., Schneider, K. & Pitnick, S. (2004). No evidence that polyandry benefits females in Drosophila melanogaster. Evolution 58, 1242-1250.
34. Bybee, L. F., Millar, J. G., Paine, T. D. & Hanlon, C. C. (2005). Effects of single versus multiple mates: Monogamy results in increased fecundity for the beetle Phoracantha semipunctata. Journal of Insect Behavior 18, 513-527.
35. Byrne, P. G. & Roberts, J. D. (2000). Does multiple paternity improve fitness of the frog Crinia georgiana? Evolution 54, 968-973.
36. Calsbeek, R. & Sinervo, B. (2004). Within-clutch variation in offspring sex determined by differences in sire body size: Cryptic mate choice in the wild. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 17, 464-470.
37. Cameron, E., Day, T. & Rowe, L. (2003). Sexual conflict and indirect benefits. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 16, 1055-1060.
38. Capula, M. & Luiselli, L. (1994). Can female adders multiply. Nature 369, 528.
39. Cassey, P., Ewen, J. G., Blackburn, T. M. & Møller, A. P. (2004). A survey of publication bias within evolutionary ecology. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences 271, S451-S454.
40. Castella, G., Christe, P. & Chapuisat, M. (2010). Covariation between colony social structure and immune defences of workers in the ant Formica selysi. Insectes Sociaux 57, 233-238.
41. Chapman, J. R., Nakagawa, S., Coltman, D. W., Slate, J. & Sheldon, B. C. (2009). A quantitative review of heterozygosity-fitness correlations in animal populations. Molecular Ecology 18, 2746-2765.
42. Chapman, T., Arnqvist, G., Bangham, J. & Rowe, L. (2003). Sexual conflict. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 18, 41-47.
43. Cohas, A., Yoccoz, N. G., Bonenfant, C., Goossens, B., Genton, C., Galan, M., Kempenaers, B. & Allaine, D. (2008). The genetic similarity between pair members influences the frequency of extrapair paternity in alpine marmots. Animal Behaviour 76, 87-95.
44. Connallon, T. (2010). Genic capture, sex linkage, and the heritability of fitness. American Naturalist 175, 564-576.
45. Connallon, T., Cox, R. M. & Calsbeek, R. (2010). Fitness consequences of sex-specific selection. Evolution 64, 1671-1682.
46. Cooper, H. M., Hedges, L. V. & Valentine, J. C. (eds.) (2009). The Handbook of Research Synthesis and Meta-analysis, 2nd Edition. Russel Sage, New York, U.S.A.
47. Cornell, S. J. & Tregenza, T. (2007). A new theory for the evolution of polyandry as a means of inbreeding avoidance. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 274, 2873-2879.
48. Côté, I., Curtis, P., Rothstein, H. & Stewart, G. (2011). Gathering data: searching the literature and selection criteria. in J. Koricheva, J. Gurevitch & K. Mengersen (eds.). Handbook of Meta-analysis in Ecology and Evolution. Princeton University Press, Princeton, U.S.A. (in press).
49. Crudgington, H. S. & Siva-Jothy, M. T. (2000). Genital damage, kicking and early death. Nature 407, 855-856.
50. Curtsinger, J. W. (1991). Sperm competition and the evolution of multiple mating. American Naturalist 138, 93-102.
51. De Crespigny, F. E. C., Hurst, L. D. & Wedell, N. (2008). Do Wolbachia-associated incompatibilities promote polyandry? Evolution 62, 107-122.
52. Den Boer, S. P. A., Boomsma, J. J. & Baer, B. (2008). Seminal fluid enhances sperm viability in the leafcutter ant Atta colombica. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 62, 1843-1849.
53. Den Hollander, M. & Gwynne, D. T. (2009). Female fitness consequences of male harassment and copulation in seed beetles, Callosobruchus maculatus. Animal Behaviour 78, 1061-1070.
54. Denk, A. G., Holzmann, A., Peters, A., Vermeirssen, E. L. M. & Kempenaers, B. (2005). Paternity in mallards: effects of sperm quality and female sperm selection for inbreeding avoidance. Behavioral Ecology 16, 825-833.
55. Dowling, D. K., Nystrand, M. & Simmons, L. W. (2010). Maternal effects, but no good or compatible genes for sperm competitiveness in australian crickets. Evolution 64, 1257-1266.
56. Dunn, D. W., Sumner, J. P. & Goulson, D. (2005). The benefits of multiple mating to female seaweed flies, Coelopa frigida (Diptera: Coelpidae). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 58, 128-135.
57. Duval, S. & Tweedie, R. (2000). Trim and fill: A simple funnel-plot-based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analysis. Biometrics 56, 455-463.
58. Eady, P. E., Wilson, N. & Jackson, M. (2000). Copulating with multiple mates enhances female fecundity but not egg-to-adult survival in the bruchid beetle Callosobruchus maculatus. Evolution 54, 2161-2165.
59. Ebensperger, L. A. & Blumstein, D. T. (2007). Functions of non-parental infanticide. In Rodent Societies (eds J. O. Wolff and P. W. Sherman), pp. 267-269. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
60. Eberhard, W. G. (1996). Female Control: Sexual Selection by Cryptic Female Choice. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
61. Edvardsson, M. (2007). Female Callosobruchus maculatus mate when they are thirsty: resource-rich ejaculates as mating effort in a beetle. Animal Behaviour 74, 183-188.
62. Engqvist, L. (2006). Females benefit from mating with different males in the scorpionfly Panorpa cognata. Behavioral Ecology 17, 435-440.
63. Evans, J. P. (2010). Quantitative genetic evidence that males trade attractiveness for ejaculate quality in guppies. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences (in press).
64. Evans, J. P., Box, T. M., Brooshooft, P., Tatter, J. R. & Fitzpatrick, J. L. (2010). Females increase egg deposition in favor of large males in the rainbowfish, Melanotaenia australis. Behavioral Ecology 21, 465-469.
65. Evans, J. P., Brooks, R. C., Zajitschek, S. R. K. & Griffith, S. C. (2008). Does genetic relatedness of mates influence competitive fertilization success in guppies? Evolution 62, 2929-2935.
66. Evans, J. P., García-González, F. & Marshall, D. J. (2007). Sources of genetic and phenotypic variance in fertilization rates and larval traits in a sea urchin. Evolution 61, 2832-2838.
67. Evans, J. P. & Kelley, J. L. (2008). Implications of multiple mating for offspring relatedness and shoaling behaviour in juvenile guppies. Biology Letters 4, 623-626.
68. Evans, J. P. & Magurran, A. E. (2000). Multiple benefits of multiple mating in guppies. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 97, 10074-10076.
69. Evans, J. P. & Marshall, D. J. (2005). Male-by-female interactions influence fertilization success and mediate the benefits of polyandry in the sea urchin Heliocidaris erythrogramma. Evolution 59, 106-112.
70. Evans, J. P. & Rutstein, A. N. (2008). Postcopulatory sexual selection favours intrinsically good sperm competitors. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 62, 1167-1173.
71. Evans, J. P. & Simmons, L. W. (2008). The genetic basis of traits regulating sperm competition and polyandry: Can selection favour the evolution of good- and sexy-sperm? Genetica 134, 5-19.
72. Evans, J. P., Zane, L., Francescato, S. & Pilastro, A. (2003). Directional postcopulatory sexual selection revealed by artificial insemination. Nature 421, 360-363.
73. Fedorka, K. M. & Mousseau, T. A. (2002). Material and genetic benefits of female multiple mating and polyandry. Animal Behaviour 64, 361-367.
74. Fedorka, K. M., Zuk, M. & Mousseau, T. A. (2004). Immune suppression and the cost of reproductive in the ground cricket, Allonemobius socius. Evolution 58, 2478-2485.
75. Firman, R. C. & Simmons, L. W. (2008a). Polyandry facilitates postcopulatory inbreeding avoidance in house mice. Evolution 62, 603-611.
76. Firman, R. C. & Simmons, L. W. (2008b). Polyandry, sperm competition, and reproductive success in mice. Behavioral Ecology 19, 695-702.
77. Fisher, D. O., Double, M. C., Blomberg, S. P., Jennions, M. D. & Cockburn, A. (2006a). Post-mating sexual selection increases lifetime fitness of polyandrous females in the wild. Nature 444, 89-92.
78. Fisher, D. O., Double, M. C. & Moore, B. D. (2006b). Number of mates and timing of mating affect offspring growth in the small marsupial Antechinus agilis. Animal Behaviour 71, 289-297.
79. Foerster, K., Coulson, T., Sheldon, B. C., Pemberton, J. M., Clutton-Brock, T. H. & Kruuk, L. E. B. (2007). Sexually antagonistic genetic variation for fitness in red deer. Nature 447, 1107-U9.
80. Foerster, K., Delhey, K., Johnsen, A., Lifjeld, J. T. & Kempenaers, B. (2003). Females increase offspring heterozygosity and fitness through extra-pair matings. Nature 425, 714-717.
81. Fossøy, F., Johnsen, A. & Lifjeld, J. T. (2008). Multiple genetic benefits of female promiscuity in a socially monogamous passerine. Evolution 62, 145-156.
82. Freeman-Gallant, C. R., Wheelwright, N. T., Meiklejohn, K. E. & Sollecito, S. V. (2006). Genetic similarity, extrapair paternity, and offspring quality in Savannah sparrows (Passerculus sandwichensis). Behavioral Ecology 17, 952-958.
83. García-González, F. & Simmons, L. W. (2005). The evolution of polyandry: Intrinsic sire effects contribute to embryo viability. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 18, 1097-1103.
84. García-González, F. & Simmons, L. W. (2007). Paternal indirect genetic effects on offspring viability and the benefits of polyandry. Current Biology 17, 32-36.
85. Garvin, J. C., Abroe, B., Pedersen, M. C., Dunn, P. O. & Whittingham, L. A. (2006). Immune response of nestling warblers varies with extra-pair paternity and temperature. Molecular Ecology 15, 3833-3840.
86. Gershman, S. N. (2010). Large numbers of matings give female field crickets a direct benefit but not a genetic benefit. Journal of Insect Behavior 23, 59-68.
87. Gillingham, M. A. F., Richardson, D. S., Lovlie, H., Moynihan, A., Worley, K. & Pizzari, T. (2009). Cryptic preference for MHC-dissimilar females in male red junglefowl, Gallus gallus. Proceedings of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences 276, 1083-1092.
88. Gillott, C. (2003). Male accessory gland secretions: Modulators of female reproductive physiology and behavior. Annual Review of Entomology 48, 163-184.
89. Gove, R., Hayworth, M., Chhetri, M. & Rueppell, O. (2009). Division of labour and social insect colony performance in relation to task and mating number under two alternative response threshold models. Insectes Sociaux, 1-13.
90. Gowaty, P. A., Kim, Y. K., Rawlings, J., & Anderson, W. W. (2010). Polyandry increases offspring viability and mother survival in Drosophila pseudoobscura. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107, 13771-13776.
91. Griffith, S. C. (2007). The evolution of infidelity in socially monogamous passerines: Neglected components of direct and indirect selection. American Naturalist 169, 274-281.
92. Griffith, S. C., Owens, I. P. F. & Thuman, K. A. (2002). Extra pair paternity in birds: A review of interspecific variation and adaptive function. Molecular Ecology 11, 2195-2212.
93. Gwynne, D. T. (2008). Sexual conflict over nuptial gifts in insects. Annual Review of Entomology 53, 83-101.
94. Haddrill, P. R., Shuker, D. M., Mayes, S. & Majerus, M. E. N. (2007). Temporal effects of multiple mating on components of fitness in the two-spot ladybird, Adalia bipunctata (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae). European Journal of Entomology 104, 393-398.
95. Hall, M. D., Lailvaux, S. P., Blows, M. W. & Brooks, R. C. (2010). Sexual conflict and the maintenance of multivariate genetic variation. Evolution 64, 1697-1703.
96. Hasson, O. & Stone, L. (2009). Male infertility, female fertility and extrapair copulations. Biological Reviews 84, 225-244.
97. Head, M. L., Hunt, J., Jennions, M. D. & Brooks, R. (2005). The indirect benefits of mating with attractive males outweigh the direct costs. Plos Biology 3, 289-294.
98. Hettyey, A., Hegyi, G., Puurtinen, M., Hoi, H., Torok, J. & Penn, D. J. (2010). Mate choice for genetic benefits: time to put the pieces together. Ethology 116, 1-9.
99. Hosken, D. J. & Stockley, P. (2003). Benefits of polyandry: A life history perspective. In Evolutionary Biology 33, 173-194.
100. Hosken, D. J., Taylor, M. L., Hoyle, K., Higgins, S. & Wedell, N. (2008). Attractive males have greater success in sperm competition. Current Biology 18, R553-R554.
101. Hotzy, C. & Arnqvist, G. (2009). Sperm competition favors harmful males in seed beetles. Current Biology 19, 404-407.
102. House, C. M., Walling, C. A., Stamper, C. E. & Moore, A. J. (2009). Females benefit from multiple mating but not multiple mates in the burying beetle Nicrophorus vespilloides. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 22, 1961-1966.
103. Hughes, W. O. H. & Boomsma, J. J. (2004). Genetic diversity and disease resistance in leaf-cutting ant societies. Evolution 58, 1251-1260.
104. Hughes, W. O. H. & Boomsma, J. J. (2007). Genetic polymorphism in leaf-cutting ants is phenotypically plastic. Proceedings of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences 274, 1625-1630.
105. Hughes, W. O. H., Sumner, S., Van Borm, S. & Boomsma, J. J. (2003). Worker caste polymorphism has a genetic basis in Acromyrmex leaf-cutting ants. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 100, 9394-9397.
106. Invernizzi, C., Penagaricano, F. & Tomasco, I. H. (2009). Intracolonial genetic variability in honeybee larval resistance to the chalkbrood and American foulbrood parasites. Insectes Sociaux 56, 233-240.
107. Ivy, T. M. (2007). Good genes, genetic compatibility and the evolution of polyandry: use of the diallel cross to address competing hypotheses. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 20, 479-487.
108. Ivy, T. M. & Sakaluk, S. K. (2005). Polyandry promotes enhanced offspring survival in decorated crickets. Evolution 59, 152-159.
109. Jaffe, R., Kronauer, D. J., Kraus, F. B., Boomsma, J. J. & Moritz, R. F. (2007). Worker caste determination in the army ant Eciton burchellii. Biology Letters 3, 513-516.
110. Jennions, M. D., Drayton, J. M., Brooks, R. & Hunt, J. (2007). Do female black field crickets Teleogryllus commodus benefit from polyandry? Journal of Evolutionary Biology 20, 1469-1477.
111. Jennions, M. D., Hunt, J., Graham, R. & Brooks, R. (2004). No evidence for inbreeding avoidance through postcopulatory mechanisms in the black field cricket, Teleogryllus commodus. Evolution 58, 2472-2477.
112. Jennions, M. D. & Kokko, H. (2010). Sexual Selection. In Evolutionary Behavioral Ecology (eds D. F. Westneat and C. W. Foz), pp. 343-364. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
113. Jennions, M. D., Møller, A. P. & Petrie, M. (2001). Sexually selected traits and adult survival: A meta-analysis. Quarterly Review of Biology 76, 3-36.
114. Jennions, M. D. & Petrie, M. (2000). Why do females mate multiply? A review of the genetic benefits. Biological Reviews 75, 21-64.
115. Jennions, M. D., Lortie, C., Rosenberg, M. S. & Rothstein, H. (2011). Publication and related biases. In J. Koricheva, J. Gurevitch & K. Mengersen (eds.). Handbook of Meta-analysis in Ecology and Evolution. Princeton University Press, Princeton, U.S.A. (in press).
116. Kamimura, Y. (2003). Effects of repeated mating and polyandry on the fecundity, fertility and maternal behaviour of female earwigs, Euborellia plebeja. Animal Behaviour 65, 205-214.
117. Kawagoe, T., Suzuki, N. & Matsumoto, K. (2001). Multiple mating reduces longevity of females of the windmill butterfly Atrophaneura alcinous. Ecological Entomology 26, 258-262.
118. Kekäläinen, J., Rudolfsen, G., Janhunen, M., Figenschou, L., Peuhkuri, N., Tamper, N. & Kortet, R. (2010). Genetic and potential non-genetic benefits increase offspring fitness of polyandrous females in non-resource based mating system. BMC Evolutionary Biology 10.
119. Kempenaers, B. (2007). Mate choice and genetic quality: A review of the heterozygosity theory. In Advances in the Study of Behavior, vol. 37, pp. 189-278.
120. Kirkpatrick, M. & Barton, N. H. (1997). The strength of indirect selection on female mating preferences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 94, 1282-1286.
121. Klemme, I., Eccard, J. A. & Ylönen, H. (2007). Why do female bank voles, Clethrionomys glareolus, mate multiply? Animal Behaviour 73, 623-628.
122. Klemme, I. & Ylönen, H. (2010). Polyandry enhances offspring survival in an infanticidal species. Biology Letters 6, 24-26.
123. Klemme, I., Ylönen, H. & Eccard, J. A. (2008). Long-term fitness benefits of polyandry in a small mammal, the bank vole Clethrionomys glareolus. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 275, 1095-1100.
124. Kokko, H. & Jennions, M. D. (2008). Parental investment, sexual selection and sex ratios. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 21, 919-948.
125. Kokko, H., Jennions, M. D. & Brooks, R. (2006). Unifying and testing models of sexual selection. Annual Review of Ecology Evolution and Systematics 37, 43-66.
126. Kokko, H. & Ots, I. (2005). When not to avoid inbreeding. Evolution 60, 467-475.
127. Konior, M., Radwan, J. & Kolodziejczyk, M. (2001). Polyandry increases offspring fecundity in the bulb mite. Evolution 55, 1893-1896.
128. Kotiaho, J. S., Simmons, L. W., Hunt, J. & Tomkins, J. L. (2003). Males influence maternal effects that promote sexual selection: A quantitative genetic experiment with dung beetles Onthophagus taurus. American Naturalist 161, 852-859.
129. Ladage, L. D., Gutzke, W. H. N., Simmons II, R. A. & Ferkin, M. H. (2008). Multiple mating increases fecundity, fertility and relative clutch mass in the female leopard gecko (Eublepharis macularius). Ethology 114, 512-520.
130. Leimu, R. & Koricheva, J. (2005). Does scientific collaboration increase the impact of ecological articles? Bioscience 55, 438-443.
131. Lessells, C. (2006). The evolutionary outcome of sexual conflict. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society Series B 361, 301-317.
132. Lewis, S. M. & Austad, S. N. (1994). Sexual selection in flour beetles- the relationship between sperm precedence and male olfactory attractiveness. Behavioral Ecology 5, 219-224.
133. Liker, A. & Szekely, T. (2005). Mortality costs of sexual selection and parental care in natural populations of birds. Evolution 59, 890-897.
134. Lima, S. L. & Dill, L. M. (1990). Behavioral decisions made under the risk of predation: a review and prospectus. Canadian Journal of Zoology 68, 619-640.
135. Liu, X. P., He, H. M., Kuang, X. J. & Xue, F. S. (2010). A comparison of female fitness between monogamy and polyandry in the cabbage beetle, Colaphellus bowringi. Animal Behaviour 79, 1391-1395.
136. Long, T. A. F., Pischedda, A. & Rice, W. R. (2010). Remating in Drosophila melanogaster: are indirect benefits condition dependent? Evolution 64, 2767-2774.
137. Lugo-Olguín, S. D. & Cueva Del Castillo, R. (2007). Multiple matings, female fecundity, and assessment of sperm competition risk in the protandrous grasshopper Sphenarium purpurascens (Orthoptera: Pyrgomorphidae). Annals of the Entomological Society of America 100, 591-595.
138. Madsen, T., Shine, R., Loman, J. & Hakansson, T. (1992). Why do female adders copulate so frequently? Nature 355, 440-441.
139. Magrath, M. J. L., Vedder, O., Van Der Velde, M. & Komdeur, J. (2009). Maternal effects contribute to the superior performance of extra-pair offspring. Current Biology 19, 792-797.
140. Maklakov, A. A. & Arnqvist, G. (2009). Testing for direct and indirect effects of mate choice by manipulating female choosiness. Current Biology 19, 1903-1906.
141. Marshall, D. J. & Evans, J. P. (2005). The benefits of polyandry in the free-spawning polychaete Galeolaria caespitosa. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 18, 735-741.
142. Marshall, D. J. & Evans, J. P. (2007). Context-dependent genetic benefits of polyandry in a marine hermaphrodite. Biology Letters 3, 685-688.
143. Mattila, H. R. & Seeley, T. D. (2007). Genetic diversity in honey bee colonies enhances productivity and fitness. Science 317, 362-364.
144. Mcleod, L. & Marshall, D. J. (2009). Do genetic diversity effects drive the benefits associated with multiple mating? A test in a marine invertebrate. PLoS ONE 4.
145. Mcnamara, K. B., Elgar, M. A. & Jones, T. M. (2008). A longevity cost of re-mating but no benefits of polyandry in the almond moth, Cadra cautella. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 62, 1433-1440.
146. Mengersen, K., Jennions, M. D. & Schmid, C. (2011). Statistical models for the meta-analysis of non-independent data. in J. Koricheva, J. Gurevitch & K. Mengersen (eds.). Handbook of Meta-analysis in Ecology and Evolution. Princeton University Press, Princeton, U.S.A. (in press).
147. Miller, C. W. & Moore, A. J. (2007). A potential resolution to the lek paradox through indirect genetic effects. Proceedings of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences 274, 1279-1286.
148. Møller, A. P. & Alatalo, R. V. (1999). Good-genes effects in sexual selection. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences 266, 85-91.
149. Møller, A. P. & Jennions, M. D. (2001). Testing and adjusting for publication bias. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 16, 580-586.
150. Morrow, E. H., Arnqvist, G. & Pitnick, S. (2003). Adaptation versus pleiotropy: why do males harm their mates? Behavioral Ecology 14, 802-806.
151. Murtaugh, P. A. (2002). Journal quality, effect size, and publication bias in meta-analysis. Ecology 83, 1162-1166.
152. Neff, B. D. & Pitcher, T. E. (2005). Genetic quality and sexual selection: An integrated framework for good genes and compatible genes. Molecular Ecology 14, 19-38.
153. Neff, B. D. & Pitcher, T. E. (2008). Mate choice for non-additive genetic benefits: A resolution to the lek paradox. Journal of Theoretical Biology 254, 147-155.
154. Newcomer, S. D., Zeh, J. A. & Zeh, D. W. (1999). Genetic benefits enhance the reproductive success of polyandrous females. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 96, 10236-10241.
155. Ojanguren, A. F., Evans, J. P. & Magurran, A. E. (2005). Multiple mating influences offspring size in guppies. Journal of Fish Biology 67, 1184-1188.
156. Oldroyd, B. P. & Fewell, J. H. (2007). Genetic diversity promotes homeostasis in insect colonies. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 22, 408-413.
157. Olsson, M., Gullberg, A., Tegelstrom, H., Madsen, T. & Shine, R. (1994). Can female adders multiply. Nature 369, 528-528.
158. Olsson, M., Shine, R., Madsen, T., Gullberg, A. & Tegelstrom, H. (1996). Sperm selection by females. Nature 383, 585.
159. Omkar & Mishra, G. (2005). Evolutionary significance of promiscuity in an aphidophagous ladybird, Propylea dissecta (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae). Bulletin of Entomological Research 95, 527-533.
160. Parker, G. A. (2006). Sexual conflict over mating and fertilization: an overview. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences 361, 235-259.
161. Parker, G. A. & Pizzari, T. (2010). Sperm competition and ejaculate economics. Biological Reviews 85, 897-934.
162. Pilastro, A., Simonato, M., Bisazza, A. & Evans, J. P. (2004). Cryptic female preference for colorful males in guppies. Evolution 58, 665-669.
163. Pitcher, T. E., Rodd, F. H. & Rowe, L. (2008). Female choice and the relatedness of mates in the guppy (Poecilia reticulata): Mate choice and inbreeding depression. Genetica 134, 137-146.
164. Polak, M. & Simmons, L. W. (2009). Secondary sexual trait size reveals competitive fertilization success in Drosophila bipectinata Duda. Behavioral Ecology 20, 753-760.
165. Pomiankowski, A. & Møller, A. P. (1995). A resolution of the lek paradox. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences 260, 21-29.
166. Price, T. A. R., Hodgson, D. J., Lewis, Z., Hurst, G. D. D. & Wedell, N. (2008). Selfish genetic elements promote polyandry in a fly. Science 322, 1241-1243.
167. Price, T. A. R., Hurst, G. D. D. & Wedell, N. (2010). Polyandry prevents extinction. Current Biology 20, 471-475.
168. Pryke, S. R. & Griffith, S. C. (2009). Genetic incompatibility drives sex allocation and maternal investment in a polymorphic finch. Science 323, 1605-1607.
169. Pryke, S. R., Rollins, L. A. & Griffith, S. C. (2010). Females use multiple mating and genetically loaded sperm competition to target compatible genes. Science 329, 964-967.
170. Puurtinen, M., Ketola, T. & Kotiaho, J. S. (2009). The good-genes and compatible-genes benefits of mate choice. American Naturalist 174, 741-752.
171. Qvarnström, A., Brommer, J. E. & Gustafsson, L. (2006). Testing the genetics underlying the co-evolution of mate choice and ornament in the wild. Nature 441, 84-86.
172. Qvarnström, A. & Price, T. D. (2001). Maternal effects, paternal effects and sexual selection. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 16, 95-100.
173. Ratikainen, I. & Kokko, H. (2010). Differential allocation and compensation: who deserves the silver spoon? Behavioral Ecology 21, 195-200.
174. Reber, A., Castella, G., Christe, P. & Chapuisat, M. (2008). Experimentally increased group diversity improves disease resistance in an ant species. Ecology Letters 11, 682-689.
175. Reinhardt, K., Naylor, R. A. & Siva-Jothy, M. T. (2009). Ejaculate components delay reproductive senescence while elevating female reproductive rate in an insect. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 106, 21743-21747.
176. Richardson, D. S., Komdeur, J., Burke, T. & Von Schantz, T. (2005). MHC-based patterns of social and extra-pair mate choice in the Seychelles warbler. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences 272, 759-767.
177. Rodriguez-Muñoz, R., Bretman, A., Slate, J., Walling, C. A. & Tregenza, T. (2010). Natural and sexual selection in a wild insect population. Science 328, 1269-1272.
178. Ronkainen, K., Kaitala, A. & Kivela, S. M. (2010). Polyandry, multiple mating, and female fitness in a water strider Aquarius paludum. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 64, 657-664.
179. Rosenberg, M. S. (2005). The file-drawer problem revisited: A general weighted method for calculating fail-safe numbers in meta-analysis. Evolution 59, 464-468.
180. Rosenberg, M. S., Adams, D. C. & Gurevitch, J. (2000). MetaWin Version 2.0: Statistical Software for Meta-Analysis. Sinauer Associates, Massachusetts, U.S.A.
181. Roulin, A., Altwegg, R., Jensen, H., Steinsland, I. & Schaub, M. (2010). Sex-dependent selection on an autosomal melanic female ornament promotes the evolution of sex ratio bias. Ecology Letters 13, 616-626.
182. Rubenstein, D. R. (2007). Female extrapair mate choice in a cooperative breeder: trading sex for help and increasing offspring heterozygosity. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences 274, 1895-1903.
183. Russell, A. F., Langmore, N. E., Cockburn, A., Astheimer, L. B. & Kilner, R. M. (2007). Reduced egg investment can conceal helper effects in cooperatively breeding birds. Science 317, 941-944.
184. Sato, A. & Karino, K. (2010). Female control of offspring sex ratios based on male attractiveness in the guppy. Ethology 116, 524-534.
185. Schmoll, T., Schurr, F. M., Winkel, W., Epplen, J. T. & Lubjuhn, T. (2009). Lifespan, lifetime reproductive performance and paternity loss of within-pair and extra-pair offspring in the coal tit Periparus ater. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences 276, 337-345.
186. Schwartz, S. K. & Peterson, M. A. (2006). Strong material benefits and no longevity costs of multiple mating in an extremely polyandrous leaf beetle, Chrysochus cobaltinus (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Behavioral Ecology 17, 1004-1010.
187. Seeley, T. D. & Tarpy, D. R. (2007). Queen promiscuity lowers disease within honeybee colonies. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 274, 67-72.
188. Sheldon, B. C. (2000). Differential allocation: tests, mechanisms and implications. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 15, 397-402.
189. Sheldon, B. C., Merilä, J., Qvarnström, A., Gustafsson, L. & Ellegren, H. (1997). Paternal genetic contribution to offspring condition predicted by size of male secondary sexual character. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences 264, 297-302.
190. Simmons, L. W. (2001). The evolution of polyandry: An examination of the genetic incompatibility and good-sperm hypotheses. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 14, 585-594.
191. Simmons, L. W. (2005). The evolution of polyandry: Sperm competition, sperm selection, and offspring viability. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 36, 125-146.
192. Simmons, L. W., Beveridge, M., Wedell, N. & Tregenza, T. (2006). Postcopulatory inbreeding avoidance by female crickets only revealed by molecular markers. Molecular Ecology 15, 3817-3824.
193. Simmons, L. W. & Emlen, D. J. (2006). Evolutionary trade-off between weapons and testes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences U.S.A. 103, 16346-16351.
194. Simmons, L. W. & Moore, A. J. (2009). Evolutionary quantitative genetics of sperm. Pages 405-434 in T. R. Birkhead, D. J. Hosken & S. Pitcnick (eds.). Sperm Biology: An Evolutionary Perspective. Academic Press, Burlington, IL, U.S.A.
195. Smith, C. R., Toth, A. L., Suarez, A. V. & Robinson, G. E. (2008). Genetic and genomic analyses of the division of labour in insect societies. Nature Reviews Genetics 9, 735-748.
196. Spurglin, L. G. & Richardson, D. S. (2010). How pathogens drive genetic diversity: MHC, mechanisms and misunderstandings. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 277, 979-988.
197. Suter, S. M., Bielanska, J., Rothlin-Spillmann, S., Strambini, L. & Meyer, D. R. (2009). The cost of infidelity to female reed buntings. Behavioral Ecology 20, 601-608.
198. Tarapore, D., Floreano, D. & Keller, L. (2010). Task-dependent influence of genetic architecture and mating frequency on division of labour in social insect societies. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 64, 675-684.
199. Tarpy, D. R. (2003). Genetic diversity within honeybee colonies prevents severe infections and promotes colony growth. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 270, 99-103.
200. Tarpy, D. R. & Page Jr, R. E. (2002). Sex determination and the evolution of polyandry in honey bees (Apis mellifera). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 52, 143-150.
201. Teng, Z. Q. & Kang, L. (2007). Egg-hatching benefits gained by polyandrous female locusts are not due to the fertilization advantage of nonsibling males. Evolution 61, 470-476.
202. Thomas, M. L. & Simmons, L. W. (2007). Male crickets adjust the viability of their sperm in response to female mating status. American Naturalist 170, 190-195.
203. Thomas, M. L. & Simmons, L. W. (2009). Male-derived cuticular hydrocarbons signal sperm competition intensity and affect ejaculate expenditure in crickets. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 276, 383-388.
204. Thornhill, R. & Alcock, J. (1983). The Evolution of Insect Mating Systems. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
205. Tomkins, J. L., Penrose, M. A., Greeff, J. & Lebas, N. R. (2010). Additive genetic breeding values correlate with the load of partially deleterious mutations. Science 328, 892-894.
206. Townsend, A. K., Clark, A. B. & Mcgowan, K. J. (2010). Direct benefits and genetic costs of extrapair paternity for female American Crows (Corvus brachyrhynchos). American Naturalist 175, E1-E9.
207. Tregenza, T. & Wedell, N. (1998). Benefits of multiple males in the cricket Gryllus bimaculatus. Evolution 52, 1726-1730.
208. Tregenza, T. & Wedell, N. (2000). Genetic compatibility, mate choice and patterns of parentage: Invited review. Molecular Ecology 9, 1013-1027.
209. Tregenza, T. & Wedell, N. (2002). Polyandrous females avoid costs of inbreeding. Nature 415, 71-73.
210. Tregenza, T., Wedell, N., Hosken, D. J. & Ward, P. I. (2003). Maternal effects on offspring depend on female mating pattern and offspring environment in yellow dung flies. Evolution 57, 297-304.
211. Trivers, R. L. (1972). Parental investment and sexual selection. Pages 136-179 in B. Campbell (ed.). Sexual Selection and the Descent of Man. Heinemann, London, U.K.
212. Uller, T. & Olsson, M. (2008). Multiple paternity in reptiles: Patterns and processes. Molecular Ecology 17, 2566-2580.
213. Ursprung, C., Den Hollander, M. & Gwynne, D. T. (2009). Female seed beetles, Callosobruchus maculatus, remate for male-supplied water rather than ejaculate nutrition. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 63, 781-788.
214. Van Baalen, M. & Beekman, M. (2006). The costs and benefits of genetic heterogeneity in resistance against parasites in social insects. American Naturalist 167, 568-577.
215. Van Homrigh, A., Higgie, M., Mcguigan, K. & Blows, M. W. (2007). The depletion of genetic variance by sexual selection. Current Biology 17, 528-532.
216. Wagner, W. E., Jr., Kelley, R. J., Tucker, K. R. & Harper, C. J. (2001). Females receive a life-span benefit from male ejaculates in a field cricket. Evolution 55, 994-1001.
217. Walsh, B. & Blows, M. W. (2009). Abundant genetic variation + strong selection = multivariate genetic constraints: A geometric view of adaptation. Annual Review of Ecology Evolution and Systematics 40, 41-59.
218. Wang, Q. & Davis, L. K. (2006). Females remate for sperm replenishment in a seed bug: Evidence from offspring viability. Journal of Insect Behavior 19, 337-346.
219. Watson, P. J., Arnqvist, G. & Stallmann, R. R. (1998). Sexual conflict and the energetic costs of mating and mate choice in water striders. American Naturalist 151, 46-58.
220. Wedell, N., Gage, M. J. G. & Parker, G. A. (2002). Sperm competition, male prudence and sperm-limited females. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 17, 313-320.
221. Wedell, N., Tregenza, T. & Simmons, L. W. (2008). Nuptial gifts fail to resolve a sexual conflict in an insect. Bmc Evolutionary Biology 8.
222. Welke, K. & Schneider, J. M. (2009). Inbreeding avoidance through cryptic female choice in the cannibalistic orb-web spider Argiope lobata. Behavioral Ecology 20, 1056-1062.
223. West, S. A. & Gardner, A. (2010). Altruism, spite and greenbeards. Science 327, 1341-1344.
224. Westneat, D. F. & Stewart, I. R. K. (2003). Extra-pair paternity in birds: Causes, correlates, and conflict. Annual Review of Ecology Evolution and Systematics 34, 365-396.
225. Whittingham, L. A. & Dunn, P. O. (2010). Fitness benefits of polyandry for experienced females. Molecular Ecology 19, 2328-2335.
226. Wigby, S. & Chapman, T. (2005). Sex peptide causes mating costs in female Drosophila melanogaster. Current Biology 15, 316-321.
227. Wilson-Rich, N., Spivak, M., Fefferman, N. H. & Starks, P. T. (2009). Genetic, individual, and group facilitation of disease resistance in insect societies. Annual Review of Entomology 54, 405-423.
228. Worden, B. D. & Parker, P. G. (2001). Polyandry in grain beetles, Tenebrio molitor, leads to greater reproductive success: Material or genetic benefits? Behavioral Ecology 12, 761-767.
229. Yasui, Y. (1997). A "good-sperm" model can explain the evolution of costly multiple mating by females. American Naturalist 149, 573-584.
230. Yasui, Y. (1998). The 'genetic benefits' of female multiple mating reconsidered. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 13, 246-250.
231. Zeh, J. A. & Zeh, D. W. (1997). The evolution of polyandry. 2. Post-copulatory defences against genetic incompatibility. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 264, 69-75.
232. Zeh, J. A. & Zeh, D. W. (2003). Toward a new sexual selection paradigm: Polyandry, conflict and incompatibility. Ethology 109, 929-950.
233. Zeh, J. A. & Zeh, D. W. (2006). Outbred embryos rescue inbred half-siblings in mixed-paternity broods of live-bearing females. Nature 439, 201-203.