It's all in your head: The role of quantity estimation in sperm competition

Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

Volumn 279, Issue 1730, 2012, Pages 833-840

  Shifferman, Eran M ^a  

^a KONRAD LORENZ INSTITUTE FOR EVOLUTION AND COGNITION RESEARCH   (Austria)

Author keywords

Animal cognition; Cognition; Evolution; Quantity estimation; Sexual selection; Sperm competition

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; COGNITION; DECISION MAKING; ESTIMATION METHOD; EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; SEXUAL SELECTION; SPERM COMPETITION;

ANIMALIA;

EID: 84856281104     PISSN: 09628452     EISSN: 14712970     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2011.2256     Document Type: Review

References (104)

1. Shifferman, E.M. 2009 Itsownreward: lessonstobe drawn from the reversed-reward contingency paradigm. Anim. Cogn., 12, 547-558. (doi:10.1007/s10071-009-0215-2)
2. Shifferman, E. M. 2011 The evolution of quantity estimation in the animal kingdom. PhD Thesis, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv.
3. Shima, J. S. 2002 Mechanisms of density-and numberdependent population regulation of a coral-reef fish. Mar. Fresh Res., 53, 175-179. (doi:10.1071/MF01133)
4. Parker, G. A. 1970 Sperm competition and its evolutionary consequences in the insects. Biol. Rev., 45, 525-567. (doi:10.1111/j.1469-185X.1970.tb01176.x)
5. Birkhead, T. R. & Møller, A. P. 1998 Sperm competition and sexual selection, San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
6. Simmons Leigh, W. 2001 Sperm competition and its evolutionary consequences in the insects, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
7. Wedell, N., Gage, M. J. G. & Parker, G. A. 2002 Sperm competition, male prudence and sperm-limited females. Trends Ecol. Evol., 17, 313-320. (doi:10.1016/s0169-5347(02)02533-8)
8. Parker, G. A. 1982 Why are there so many tiny sperm? Sperm competition and the maintenance of two sexes. J. Theor. Biol., 96, 281-294. (doi:10.1016/0022-5193(82)90225-9)
9. Parker, G. A., Ball, M. A., Stockley, P. & Gage, M. J. G. 1996 Sperm competition games: individual assessment of sperm competition intensity by group spawners. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, 263, 1291-1297. (doi:10.1098/ rspb.1996.0189)
10. Parker, G. A., Ball, M. A., Stockley, P. & Gage, M. J. G. 1997 Sperm competition games: a prospective analysis of risk assessment. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, 264, 1793-1802. (doi:10.1098/rspb.1997.0249)
11. Ball, M. A. & Parker, G. A. 1998 Sperm-competition games: energy dependence and competitor numbers in the continuous-external-fertilization model. IMA J. Math. Appl. Med. Biol., 15, 87-96. (doi:10.1093/ imammb/15.1.87)
12. Byrne, P. G. 2004 Male sperm expenditure under sperm competition risk and intensity in quacking frogs. Behav. Ecol., 15, 857-863. (doi:10.1093/beheco/arh098)
13. Schleicherová, D., Lorenzi, M. C., Sella, G. & Michiels, N. K. 2010 Gender expression and group size: a test in a hermaphroditic and a gonochoric congeneric species of Ophryotrocha (Polychaeta). J. Exp. Biol., 213, 1586-1590. (doi:10.1242/jeb.041814)
14. Bonilla, M. M., Zeh, D. W., White, A. M. & Zeh, J. A. 2011 Discriminating males and unpredictable females: males bias sperm allocation in favor of virgin females. Ethology, 117, 740-748. (doi:10.1111/ j.1439-0310.2011.01928.x)
15. Thomas, M. L. & Simmons, L. W. 2009 Male-derived cuticular hydrocarbons signal sperm competition intensity and affect ejaculate expenditure in crickets. Proc. R. Soc. B, 276, 383-388. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2008.1206)
16. Schärer, L. & Wedekind, C. 2001 Social situation, sperm competition and sex allocation in a simultaneous hermaphrodite parasite, the cestode Schistocephalus solidus, J. Evol. Biol., 14, 942-953. (doi:10.1046/ j.1420-9101.2001.00350.x)
17. Janicke, T. & Schärer, L. 2010 Sperm competition affects sex allocation but not sperm morphology in a flatworm. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol., 64, 1367-1375. (doi:10.1007/s00265-010-0951-y)
18. Schärer, L. & Ladurner, P. 2003 Phenotypically plastic adjustment of sex allocation in a simultaneous hermaphrodite. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, 270, 935-941. (doi:10. 1098/rspb.2002.2323)
19. Lorenzi, M. C., Sella, G., Schleicherová, D. &Ramella, L. 2005 Outcrossing hermaphroditicpolychaeteworms adjust their sex allocation to social conditions. J. Evol. Biol., 18, 1341-1347. (doi:10.1111/j.1420-9101.2005.00916.x)
20. Tan, G. N., Govedich, F. R. & Burd, M. 2004 Social group size, potential sperm competition and reproductive investment in a hermaphroditic leech, Helobdella papillornata, (Euhirudinea: Glossiphoniidae). J. Evol. Biol., 17, 574-580. (doi:10.1111/j.1420-9101.2004.00692.x)
21. Schleicherová, D., Lorenzi, M. C. & Sella, G. 2006 How outcrossing hermaphrodites sense the presence of conspecifics and suppress female allocation. Behav. Ecol., 17, 1-5. (doi:10.1093/beheco/ari093)
22. Hosken, D. J. & Ward, P. I. 2001 Experimental evidence for testis size evolution via sperm competition. Ecol. Lett., 4, 10-13. (doi:10.1046/j.1461-0248.2001.00198.x)
23. Bretman, A., Fricke, C. & Chapman, T. 2009 Plastic responses of male Drosophila melanogaster, to the level of sperm competition increase male reproductive fitness. Proc. R. Soc. B, 276, 1705-1711. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2008.1878)
24. Fedorka, K. M., Winterhalter, W. E. & Ware, B. 2011 Perceived sperm competition intensity influences seminal fluid protein production prior to courtship and mating. Evolution, 65, 584-590. (doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.2010.01141.x)
25. García-González, F. & Gomendio, M. 2004 Adjustment of copula duration and ejaculate size according to the risk of sperm competition in the golden egg bug (Phyllomorpha laciniata). Behav. Ecol., 15, 23-30. (doi:10.1093/ beheco/arg095)
26. Flay, C. D., He, X. Z. & Wang, Q. 2009 Influence of male density on the courtship and mating duration of male rice weevils, Sitophilus oryzae, N. Z. Plant Prot., 62, 76-79.
27. Solensky, M. J. & Oberhauser, K. S. 2009 Male monarch butterflies, Danaus plexippus, adjust ejaculates in response to intensity of sperm competition. Anim. Behav., 77, 465-472. (doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2008.10.026)
28. Schaus, J. M. & Sakaluk, S. K. 2001 Ejaculate expenditures of male crickets in response to varying risk and intensity of sperm competition: not all species play games. Behav. Ecol., 12, 740-745. (doi:10.1093/ beheco/12.6.740)
29. Thomas, M. L. & Simmons Leigh, W. 2007 Male crickets adjust the viability of their sperm in response to female mating status. Am. Nat., 170, 190-195. (doi:10.1086/519404)
30. Gage, A. R. & Barnard, C. J. 1996 Male crickets increase sperm number in relation to competition and female size. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol., 38, 349-353. (doi:10.1007/s002650050251)
31. Carazo, P., Font, E., Forteza-Behrendt, E. & Desfilis, E. 2009 Quantity discrimination in Tenebrio molitor: evidence of numerosity discrimination in an invertebrate? Anim. Cogn., 12, 463-470. (doi:10.1007/s10071-008-0207-7)
32. Baeza, J. A. 2007 No effect of group size on sex allocation in a protandric-simultaneous hermaphroditic shrimp. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. UK, 87, 1169-1174. (doi:10.1017/S0025315407057542)
33. Aspbury, A. S. 2007 Sperm competition effects on sperm production and expenditure in sailfin mollies, Poecilia latipinna, Behav. Ecol., 18, 776-780. (doi:10. 1093/beheco/arm044)
34. Evans, J. P. 2009 No evidence for sperm priming responses under varying sperm competition risk or intensity in guppies. Naturwissenschaften, 96, 771-779. (doi:10.1007/s00114-009-0529-6)
35. Candolin, U. & Reynolds, J. D. 2002 Adjustments of ejaculation rates in response to risk of sperm competition in a fish, the bitterling (Rhodeus sericeus). Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, 269, 1549-1553. (doi:10.1098/ rspb.2002.2055)
36. Smith, C. H., Reichard, M. & Jurajda, P. 2003 Assessment of sperm competition by European bitterling, Rhodeus sericeus, Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol., 53, 206-213. (doi:10.1007/s00265-002-0576-x)
37. Pilastro, A., Scaggiante, M. & Rasotto, M. B. 2002 Individual adjustment of sperm expenditure accords with sperm competition theory. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA, 99, 9913-9915. (doi:10.1073/pnas.152133499)
38. Scaggiante, M., Rasotto, M. B., Romualdi, C. & Pilastro, A. 2005 Territorial male gobies respond aggressively to sneakers but do not adjust their sperm expenditure. Behav. Ecol., 16, 1001-1007. (doi:10.1093/beheco/ari081)
39. Fuller, R. C. 1998 Sperm competition affects male behaviour and sperm output in the rainbow darter. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, 265, 2365-2371. (doi:10.1098/ rspb.1998.0585)
40. Galeotti, P., Rubolini, D., Pupin, F., Sacchi, R., Altobelli, E., Nardi, P. A. & Fasola, M. 2009 Presence of rivals reduces mating probability but does not affect ejaculate size in the freshwater crayfish Austropotamobius italicus, Behaviour, 146, 45-68. (doi:10.1163/156853908x390922)
41. Verrell, P. A. 1983 The influence of the ambient sex ratio and intermale competition on the sexual behavior of the red-spotted newt, Notophthalmus viridescens, (Amphibia: Urodela: Salamandridae). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol., 13, 307-313. (doi:10.1007/bf00299678)
42. McWilliams, S. R. 1992 Courtship behavior of the small-mouthed salamander (Ambystoma texanum): the effects of conspecific males on male mating tactics. Behaviour, 121, 1-19. (doi:10.1163/156853992X00417)
43. Byrne, P. G. & Roberts, J. D. 1999 Simultaneous mating with multiple males reduces fertilization success in the myobatrachid frog Crinia georgiana, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, 266, 717-721. (doi:10.1098/rspb.1999.0695)
44. delBarco-Trillo, J. H. & Ferkin, M. H. 2006 Male meadow voles respond differently to risk and intensity of sperm competition. Behav. Ecol., 17, 581-585. (doi:10.1093/beheco/ark001)
45. Lemaître, J.-F., Ramm, S. A., Hurst, J. L. & Stockley, P. 2010 Social cues of sperm competition influence accessory reproductive gland size in a promiscuous mammal. Proc. R. Soc. B, 278, 1171-1176. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2010.1828)
46. Reznikova, Z. & Ryabko, B. 2011 Numerical competence in animals, with an insight from ants. Behaviour, 148, 405-434. (doi:10.1163/000579511x568562)
47. Rondeau, A. & Sainte-Marie, B. 2001 Variable mateguarding time and sperm allocation by male snow crabs (Chionoecetes opilio) in response to sexual competition, and their impact on the mating success of females. Biol. Bull., 201, 204-217. (doi:10.2307/ 1543335)
48. Siva-Jothy, M. T. & Stutt, A. D. 2003 A matter of taste: direct detection of female mating status in the bedbug. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, 270, 649-652. (doi:10.1098/ rspb.2002.2260)
49. delBarco-Trillo, J. H. 2011 Adjustment of sperm allocation under high risk of sperm competition across taxa: a meta-analysis. J. Evol. Biol., 24, 1706-1714. (doi:10.1111/j.1420-9101.2011.02293.x)
50. Kelly, C. D. & Jennions, M. D. 2011 Sexual selection and sperm quantity: meta-analyses of strategic ejaculation. Biol. Rev., 86, 863-884. (doi:10.1111/j.1469-185X.2011.00175.x)
51. Bode, M. & Marshall, D. J. 2007 The quick and the dead? Sperm competition and sexual conflict in sea. Evolution, 61, 2693-2700. (doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.2007.00232.x)
52. Engqvist, L. 2007 Male scorpionflies assess the amount of rival sperm transferred by females' previous mates. Evolution, 61, 1489-1494. (doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.2007.00107.x)
53. Gelman, R. & Gallistel, C. R. 1978 The child's understanding of number, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
54. Arnold, K. & Zuberbühler, K. 2008 Meaningful call combinations in a non-human primate. Curr. Biol., 18, R202-R203. (doi:10.1016/j.cub.2008.01.040)
55. Sandner, P. & Schärer, L. 2010 No plastic responses to experimental manipulation of sperm competition per se, in a free-living flatworm. Ethology, 116, 292-299. (doi:10.1111/j.1439-0310.2010.01746.x)
56. Bierbach, D. et al., 2011 Male fish use prior knowledge about rivals to adjust their mate choice. Biol. Lett., 7, 349-351. (doi:10.1098/rsbl.2010.0982)
57. Barry, K. L. & Kokko, H. 2010 Male mate choice: why sequential choice can make its evolution difficult. Anim. Behav., 80, 163-169. (doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2010.04.020)
58. Grant, J. W. A., Bryant, M. J. & Soos, C. E. 1995 Operational sex ratio, mediated by synchrony of female arrival, alters the variance of male mating success in Japanese medaka. Anim. Behav., 49, 367-375. (doi:10. 1006/anbe.1995.9998)
59. Reinhardt, K. 2001 Determinants of ejaculate size in a grasshopper (Chorthippus parallelus). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol., 50, 503-510. (doi:10.1007/s002650100398)
60. Yamane, T. & Miyatake, T. 2008 Strategic ejaculation and level of polyandry in Callosobruchus chinensis, (Coleoptera: Bruchidae). J. Ethol., 26, 225-231. (doi:10.1007/s10164-007-0051-2)
61. Martel, V., Damiens, D. & Boivin, G. 2008 Strategic ejaculation in the egg parasitoid Trichogramma turkestanica, (Hymenoptera: Trichogrammatidae). Ecol. Entomol., 33, 357-361. (doi:10.1111/j.1365-2311.2007.00973.x)
62. Loher, W. &Dambach, M. 1989Reproductive behavior. In Cricket behavior and neurobiology, (eds F. Huber, T. E. Moore & W. Loher), pp. 43-82. Ithaca, NY: Comstock Pub. Associates.
63. Immler, S., Pryke, S. R., Birkhead, T. R. & Griffith, S. C. 2010 Pronounced within-individual plasticity in sperm morphometry across social environments. Evolution, 64, 1634-1643. (doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.2009.00924.x)
64. McNamara, K. B., Elgar, M. A. & Jones, T. M. 2010 Adult responses to larval population size in the almond moth, Cadra cautella, Ethology, 116, 39-46. (doi:10.1111/j.1439-0310.2009.01714.x)
65. Vermeulen, A., Engels, S., Engqvist, L. & Sauer, K. P. 2009 Phenotypic plasticity in sperm traits in scorpionflies (Mecoptera: Panorpidae): consequences of larval history and seasonality on sperm length and sperm transfer. Eur. J. Entomol., 106, 347-352.
66. Meck, W. H. & Church, R. M. 1983 A mode control model of counting and timing processes. J. Exp. Psychol. Anim. Behav. Proc., 9, 320-334. (doi:10.1037/0097-7403.9.3.320)
67. Walsh, V. 2003 A theory of magnitude: common cortical metrics of time, space and quantity. Trends Cogn. Sci., 7, 483-488. (doi:10.1016/j.tics.2003.09.002)
68. Ziege, M., Mahlow, K., Hennige-Schulz, C., Kronmarck, C., Tiedemann, R., Streit, B. & Plath, M. 2009 Audience effects in the Atlantic molly (Poecilia mexicana): prudent male mate choice in response to perceived sperm competition risk? Front. Zool., 6, 17. (doi:10.1186/1742-9994-6-17)
69. Pettersson, L. B., Ramnarine, I. W., Becher, S. A., Mahabir, R. & Magurran, A. E. 2004 Sex ratio dynamics and fluctuating selection pressures in natural populations of the Trinidadian guppy, Poecilia reticulata, Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol., 55, 461-468. (doi:10.1007/s00265-003-0727-8)
70. Montrose, T. V., Edwin Harris, W., Moore, A. J. & Moore, P. J. 2008 Sperm competition within a, dominance hierarchy: investment in social status vs. investment in ejaculates. J. Evol. Biol., 21, 1290-1296. (doi:10.1111/j.1420-9101.2008.01570.x)
71. Oku, K. 2009 Effects of density experience on mate guarding behavior by adult male Kanzawa spider mites. J. Ethol., 27, 279-283. (doi:10.1007/s10164-008-0117-9)
72. Bretman, A., Fricke, C., Hetherington, P., Stone, R. & Chapman, T. 2010 Exposure to rivals andplastic responses to sperm competition in Drosophila melanogaster, Behav. Ecol., 21, 317-321. (doi:10.1093/beheco/arp189)
73. Stoltz, J. A. & Andrade, M. C. B. 2009 Female's courtship threshold allows intruding males to mate with reduced effort. Proc. R. Soc. B, 277, 585-592. (doi:10. 1098/rspb.2009.1554)
74. Edward, D. A., Fricke, C. & Chapman, T. 2010 Adaptations to sexual selection and sexual conflict: insights from experimental evolution and artificial selection. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B, 365, 2541-2548. (doi:10.1098/ rstb.2010.0027)
75. de Jong, K., Wacker, S., Amundsen, T. & Forsgren, E. 2009 Do operational sex ratio and density affect mating behaviour? An experiment on the two-spotted goby. Anim. Behav., 78, 1229-1238. (doi:10.1016/j. anbehav.2009.08.006)
76. Price, A. C. & Helen Rodd, F. 2006 The effect of social environment on male-male competition in guppies (Poecilia reticulata). Ethology, 112, 22-32. (doi:10.1111/ j.1439-0310.2006.01142.x)
77. Mautz, B. S. & Jennions, M. D. 2011 The effect of competitor presence and relative competitive ability on male mate choice. Behav. Ecol., 22, 769-775. (doi:10. 1093/beheco/arr048)
78. Chapman, M. R. & Kramer, D. L. 1996 Guarded resources: the effect of intruder number on the tactics and success of defenders and intruders. Anim. Behav., 52, 83-94. (doi:10.1006/anbe.1996.0154)
79. Keagy, J., Savard, J. F. & Borgia, G. 2011 Complex relationship between multiple measures of cognitive ability and male mating success in satin bowerbirds, Ptilonorhynchus violaceus, Anim. Behav., 81, 1063-1070. (doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2011.02.018)
80. Shohet, A. J. & Watt, P. J. 2009 Female guppies Poecilia reticulata, prefer males that can learn fast. J. Fish Biol., 75, 1323-1330. (doi:10.1111/j.1095-8649.2009.02366.x)
81. Lyons, C. & Barnard, C. J. 2006 A learned response to sperm competition in the field cricket, Gryllus bimaculatus (de Geer). Anim. Behav., 72, 673-680. (doi:10.1016/ j.anbehav.2005.12.006)
82. Matthews, R. N., Domjan, M., Ramsey, M. & Crews, D. 2007 Learning effects on sperm competition and reproductive fitness. Psychol. Sci., 18, 758-762. (doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01974.x)
83. Boogert, N. J., Fawcett, T.W. & Lefebvre, L. 2011 Mate choice for cognitive traits: a review of the evidence in nonhuman vertebrates. Behav. Ecol., 22, 447-459. (doi:10.1093/beheco/arq173)
84. Clark, A. G. 2002 Sperm competition and the maintenance of polymorphism. Heredity, 88, 148-153. (doi:10. 1038/sj.hdy.6800019)
85. Simmons, L. W. & García-González, F. 2008 Evolutionary reduction in testes size and competitive success in response to the experimental removal of sexual selection in dung beetles. Evolution, 62, 2580-2591. (doi:10. 1111/j.1558-5646.2008.00479.x)
86. Hosken, D. J., Garner, T. W. J. & Ward, P. I. 2001 Sexual conflict selects for male and female reproductive characters. Curr. Biol, 11, 489-493. (doi:10.1016/ s0960-9822(01)00146-4)
87. Holland, B. & Rice, W. R. 1999 Experimental removal of sexual selection reverses intersexual antagonistic coevolution and removes a reproductive load. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA, 96, 5083-5088. (doi:10.1073/pnas.96.9.5083)
88. Lickliter, R., Bahrick, L. E. & Markham, R. G. 2006 Intersensory redundancy educates selective attention in bobwhite quail embryos. Dev. Sci., 9, 604-615. (doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2006.00539.x)
89. Johnstone, R. A. 1996 Multiple displays in animal communication: 'backup signals' and 'multiple messages'. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B, 351, 329-338. (doi:10. 1098/rstb.1996.0026)
90. Smith, C. C. & Ryan, M. J. 2010 Evolution of sperm quality but not quantity in the internally fertilized fish Xiphophorus nigrensis, J. Evol. Biol., 23, 1759-1771. (doi:10.1111/j.1420-9101.2010.02041.x)
91. Nakatsuru, K. & Kramer, D. L. 1982 Is sperm cheap? Limited male fertility and female choice in the lemon Tetra (Pisces, Characidae). Science, 216, 753-755. (doi:10.1126/science.216.4547.753)
92. Pizzari, T., Worley, K., Burke, T. & Froman, D. 2008 Sperm competition dynamics: ejaculate fertilising efficiency changes differentially with time. BMC Evol. Biol., 8, 332. (doi:10.1186/1471-2148-8-332)
93. Awata, S., Takeyama, T., Makino, Y., Kitamura, Y. & Kohda, M. 2008 Cooperatively breeding cichlid fish adjust their testis size but not sperm traits in relation to sperm competition risk. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol., 62, 1701-1710. (doi:10.1007/s00265-008-0598-0)
94. Vaughn, A. A. & Ferkin, M. H. 2011 The presence and number of male competitor's scent marks and female reproductive state affect the response of male meadow voles to female conspecifics' odours. Behaviour, 148, 927-943. (doi:10.1163/000579511x584375)
95. Vaughn, A. A., delBarco-Trillo, J. H. & Ferkin, M. H. 2010 Self-grooming by male meadow voles differs across copulation but is not affected by the risk and intensity of sperm competition. Behaviour, 147, 259-274. (doi:10.1163/000579509x12523920754410)
96. delBarco-Trillo, J. H. & Ferkin, M. H. 2007 Risk of sperm competition does not influence copulatory behavior in the promiscuous meadow vole (Microtus pennsylvanicus). J. Ethol., 25, 139-145. (doi:10.1007/ s10164-006-0008-x)
97. LaMunyon, C. W. & Ward, S. 1998 Larger sperm outcompete smaller sperm in the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, 265, 1997-2002. (doi:10.1098/rspb.1998.0531)
98. Petersen, C.W. 1991 Sex allocation in hermaphroditic sea basses. Am. Nat., 138, 650-667. (doi:10.1086/285240)
99. Schärer, L. 2009 Tests of sexual allocation theory in simultaneously hermaphroditic animals. Evolution, 63, 1377-1405. (doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.2009.00669.x)
100. Charnov, E. L. 1982 The theory of sex allocation, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
101. Ootsubo, T. & Sakai, M. 1992 Initiation of spermatophore protrusion behavior in the male cricket Gryllus bimaculatus, De Geer. Zoo. Sci., 9, 955-969.
102. Locher, R. & Baur, B. 1999 Effects of intermating interval on spermatophore size and sperm number in the simultaneously hermaphroditic land snail Arianta arbustorum, Ethology, 105, 839-849. (doi:10.1046/j.1439-0310.1999.00452.x)
103. Reinhold, K. & Von Helversen, D. 1997 Sperm number, spermatophore weight and remating in the bushcricket Poecilimon veluchianus, Ethology, 103, 12-18. (doi:10. 1111/j.1439-0310.1997.tb00002.x)
104. Voight, J. R. 2009 Differences in spermatophore availability among octopodid species (Cephalopoda: Octopoda). Malacologia, 51, 143-153. (doi:10.4002/040.051.0110)