Baculum morphology predicts reproductive success of male house mice under sexual selection

BMC Biology

Volumn 11, Issue , 2013, Pages

  Stockley, Paula ^a   Ramm, Steven A ^a,b   Sherborne, Amy L ^a,c   Thom, Michael D F ^a,d   Paterson, Steve ^a   Hurst, Jane L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL   (United Kingdom)

^b BIELEFELD UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^c INSTITUTE OF CANCER RESEARCH   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Baculum; Cryptic female choice; Genital evolution; Os penis; Penile morphology; Postcopulatory sexual selection; Sperm competition

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; FEMALE; HISTOLOGY; MALE; MATE CHOICE; MOUSE; ORGAN SIZE; PENIS; PHYSIOLOGY; QUANTITATIVE TRAIT; REPRODUCTION;

ANIMALS; FEMALE; MALE; MATING PREFERENCE, ANIMAL; MICE; ORGAN SIZE; PENIS; QUANTITATIVE TRAIT, HERITABLE; REPRODUCTION;

EID: 84879534846     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17417007     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1741-7007-11-66     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Eberhard WG. Sexual Selection and Animal Genitalia 1985, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
2. Hosken DJ, Stockley P. Sexual selection and genital evolution. Trends Ecol Evol 2004, 19:87-93. 10.1016/j.tree.2003.11.012, 16701234.
3. Arnqvist G. Comparative evidence for the evolution of genitalia by sexual selection. Nature 1998, 393:784-786.
4. Brennan PLR, Prum RO, McCracken KG, Sorenson MD, Wilson RE, Birkhead TR. Coevolution of male and female genital morphology in waterfowl. PLoS One 2007, 2:e418. 10.1371/journal.pone.0000418, 1855079, 17476339.
5. Burt WH. Bacula of North American mammals. Misc Publ Mus Zool. Univ Michigan 1960, 113:1-75.
6. Miller EH. Genitalic traits of mammals: systematics and variation. The Evolution of Primary Sexual Characters in Animals 2010, 471-493. Oxford: Oxford University Press, Leonard J, Cordoba-Aguilar A.
7. Stockley P. The baculum. Curr Biol 2012, 22:R1032-R1033. 10.1016/j.cub.2012.11.001, 23257184.
8. Patterson BD, Thaeler CS. The mammalian baculum - Hypotheses on the nature of bacular variability. J Mammal 1982, 63:1-15.
9. Dixson AF. Primate Sexuality: Comparative Studies of the Prosimians, Monkeys, Apes and Human Beings.2nd edition 2012, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
10. Ramm SA. Sexual selection and genital evolution in mammals: a phylogenetic analysis of baculum length. Am Nat 2007, 169:360-369.
11. Hosken DJ, Jones KE, Chipperfield K, Dixson AF. Is the bat os penis sexually selected?. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 2001, 50:450-460.
12. Kinahan AA, Bennett NC, O'Riain MJ, Hart L, Bateman PW. Size matters: genital allometry in an African mole-rat (Family: Bathyergidae). Evol Ecol 2007, 21:201-213.
13. Miller EH, Burton LE. It's all relative: allometry and variation in the baculum (os penis) of the harp seal, Pagophilus groenlandicus (Carnivora :Phocidae). Biol J Linnean Soc 2007, 72:345-355.
14. Miller EH, Nagorsen DW. Bacular variation and allometry in the western marten Martes caurina. Acta Theriol 2008, 53:129-142.
15. Miller EH, Jones IL, Stenson GB. Baculum and testes of the hooded seal (Cystophora cristata): growth and size-scaling and their relationships to sexual selection. Can J Zool 1999, 77:470-479.
16. Ramm SA, Khoo L, Stockley P. Sexual selection and the rodent baculum: an intraspecific study in the house mouse (Mus musculus domesticus). Genetica 2010, 138:129-137. 10.1007/s10709-009-9385-8, 19597945.
17. Tasikas DE, Fairn ER, Laurence S, Schulte-Hostedde AI. Baculum variation and allometry in the muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus): a case for sexual selection. Evol Ecol 2009, 23:223-232.
18. Lemaitre JF, Ramm SA, Jennings N, Stockley P. Genital morphology linked to social status in the bank vole (Myodes glareolus). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 2012, 66:97-105.
19. Çolak E, Yigit N, Sozen M, Colak R, Ozkutr S, Kankilic T, Kankilic T. The morphological analysis of Mus domesticus and Mus macedonicus(Mammalia: Rodentia) in Turkey. Turkish J Zool 2006, 30:309-317.
20. Preston BT, Stockley P. Risk of sexual competition stimulates premature and repeated ejaculation in a mammal. Curr Biol 2004, 16:R239-R241.
21. Dean MD, Ardlie KG, Nachman MW. The frequency of multiple paternity suggests that sperm competition is common in house mice (Mus domesticus). Mol Ecol 2006, 15:4141-4151. 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2006.03068.x, 2904556, 17054508.
22. Clutton-Brock TH. Reproductive Success. Studies of Individual Variation in Contrasting Breeding Systems 1988, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
23. Parker GA, Ball MA. Sperm competition, mating rate and the evolution of testis and ejaculate sizes: a population model. Biol Lett 2005, 1:235-238. 10.1098/rsbl.2004.0273, 1626223, 17148175.
24. Ramm SA, Parker GA, Stockley P. Sperm competition and the evolution of male reproductive anatomy in rodents. Proc R Soc London B Biol Sci 2005, 272:949-955.
25. Bronson FH, Marsden HM. Preputial gland as an indicator of social dominance in male mice. Behav Biol 1973, 9:625-628. 10.1016/S0091-6773(73)80056-2, 4761068.
26. Diamond M. Intromission pattern and species vaginal code in relation to induction of pseudopregnancy. Science 1970, 169:995-997. 10.1126/science.169.3949.995, 5468311.
27. McGill TE, Coughlin RC. Ejaculatory reflex and luteal activity induction in Mus musculus. J Reprod Fert 1970, 21:215-220.
28. Toner JP, Adler NT. Influence of mating and vaginocervical stimulation on rat uterine activity. J Reprod Fert 1986, 78:239-249.
29. Pomiankowski A, Møller AP. A resolution of the lek paradox. Proc R Soc London B Biol Sci 1995, 260:21-29.
30. Bonduriansky R. Sexual selection and allometry: a critical reappraisal of the evidence and ideas. Evolution 2007, 61:838-849. 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2007.00081.x, 17439616.
31. Eberhard WG, Huber BA, Rodriguez RL, Briceno RD, Salas I, Rodriquez V. One size fits all? Relationships between the size and degree of variation in genitalia and other body parts in twenty species of insects and spiders. Evolution 1998, 52:415-431.
32. Parker GA. Sperm competition and the evolution of ejaculates: towards a theory base. Sperm Competition and Sexual Selection 1998, 3-49. London: Academic Press, Birkhead TR, Møller AP.
33. Preston BT, Stevenson IR, Pemberton JM, Coltman DW, Wilson K. Overt and covert competition in a promiscuous mammal: the importance of weaponry and testes size to male reproductive success. Proc R Soc London B Biol Sci 2003, 270:633-640.
34. Schulte-Hostedde AI, Millar JS. Intraspecific variation of testis size and sperm length in the yellow-pine chipmunk (Tamias amoenus): implications for sperm competition and reproductive success. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 2004, 55:272-277.
35. Stockley P, Searle JB, Macdonald DW, Jones CS. Correlates of reproductive success within alternative mating tactics of the common shrew. Behav Ecol 1996, 7:334-340.
36. Poiani A. Complexity of seminal fluid: a review. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 2006, 60:289-310.
37. Lemaitre JF, Ramm SA, Hurst JL, Stockley P. Social cues of sperm competition influence accessory reproductive gland size in a promiscuous mammal. Proc R Soc London B Biol Sci 2011, 278:1171-1176.
38. Dean MD. Genetic disruption of the copulatory plug in mice leads to severely reduced fertility. PLoS Genet 2013, 9:e1003185. 10.1371/journal.pgen.1003185, 3547826, 23341775.
39. Hotzy C, Polak M, Ronn JL, Arnqvist G. Phenotypic engineering unveils the function of genital morphology. Curr Biol 2012, 22:2258-2261. 10.1016/j.cub.2012.10.009, 23103188.
40. Eberhard WG. Experiments with genitalia: a commentary. Trends Ecol Evol 2011, 26:17-21. 10.1016/j.tree.2010.10.009, 21093955.
41. Macagno AL, Pizzo A, Parzer HF, Palestrini C, Rolando A, Moczek AP. Shape - but not size - codivergence between male and female copulatory structures in Onthophagus beetles. PLoS One 2011, 6:e28893. 10.1371/journal.pone.0028893, 3237555, 22194942.
42. Rowe L, Arnqvist G. Sexual selection and the evolution of genital shape and complexity in water striders. Evolution 2012, 66:40-54. 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2011.01411.x, 22220863.
43. Sherborne AL, Thom MD, Paterson S, Jury F, Ollier WER, Stockley P, Beynon RJ, Hurst JL. The genetic basis of inbreeding avoidance in house mice. Curr Biol 2007, 17:2061-2066. 10.1016/j.cub.2007.10.041, 2148465, 17997307.
44. Kalinowski ST, Taper ML, Marshall TC. Revising how the computer program CERVUS accommodates genotyping error increases success in paternity assignment. Mol Ecol 2007, 16:1099-1106. 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2007.03089.x, 17305863.
45. Rodriguez E, Weiss DA, Yang JH, Menshenina J, Ferrett M, Cunha TJ, Barcellos D, Chan LY, Risbridger G, Cunha GR, Baskin LS. New insights on the morphology of adult mouse penis. Biol Reprod 2011, 85:1216-1221. 10.1095/biolreprod.111.091504, 3223253, 21918128.
46. Image J http://rsbweb.nih.gov/ij/.
47. Bates D, Maechler M, Bolker B. lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes 2011, http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lme4.