Multiple paternity in wild house mice (Mus musculus musculus): Effects on offspring genetic diversity and body mass

Ecology and Evolution

Volumn 4, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 200-209

  Thonhauser, Kerstin E ^a   Thoß, Michaela ^a   Musolf, Kerstin ^a,b   Klaus, Teresa ^a   Penn, Dustin J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VETERINARY MEDICINE   (Austria)

^b CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

Author keywords

Genetic benefits; Genetic diversity; Heterozygosity; House mice; Multiple paternity

Indexed keywords

EID: 84892638553     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20457758     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/ece3.920     Document Type: Article

References (78)

1. Arnqvist, G., and T. Nilsson 2000. The evolution of polyandry: multiple mating and female fitness in insects. Anim. Behav. 60:145-164.
2. Baer, B., and P. Schmid-Hempel 1999. Experimental variation in polyandry affects parasite loads and fitness in a bumble-bee. Nature 397:151-154.
3. Baker, J. D., and C. W. Fowler 1992. Pup weight and survival of northern fur seals Callorhinus ursinus. J. Zool. 227:231-238.
4. Bateman, A. J. 1948. Intra-sexual selection in Drosophila. Heredity 2:349-368.
5. Bates, D., M. Maechler, and B. Bolker, 2011. lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R package version 0.999375-42.
6. Bensch, S., H. Andrén, B. Hansson, H. Pedersen, H. Sand, D. Sejberg, et al. 2006. Selection for heterozygosity gives hope to a wild population of inbred wolves. PLoS ONE 1:e72.
7. Berteaux, D., J. Bêty, E. Rengifo, and J.-M. Bergeron 1999. Multiple paternity in meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus): investigating the role of the female. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 45:283-291.
8. Boursot, P., J. C. Auffray, J. Britton-Davidian, and F. Bonhomme 1993. The evolution of house mice. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 24:119-152.
9. Briese, L. A., and M. H. Smith 1974. Seasonal abundance and movement of nine species of small mammals. J. Mammal. 55:615-629.
10. Charpentier, M. J. E., C. V. Williams, and C. M. Drea 2008. Inbreeding depression in ring-tailed lemurs (Lemur catta): genetic diversity predicts parasitism, immunocompetence, and survivorship. Conserv. Genet. 9:1605-1615.
11. Cohas, A., N. G. Yoccoz, and D. Allainé 2007. Extra-pair paternity in alpine marmots, Marmota marmota: genetic quality and genetic diversity effects. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 61:1081-1092.
12. Coltman, D. W., J. G. Pilkington, J. A. Smith, and J. M. Pemberton 1999. Parasite-mediated selection against inbred Soay sheep in a free-living, island population. Evolution 53:1259-1267.
13. Daly, M. 1978. Cost of mating. Am. Nat. 112:771-774.
14. Dean, M., G. Ardlie, and M. Nachman 2006. The frequency of multiple paternity suggests that sperm competition is common in house mice (Mus domesticus). Mol. Ecol. 15:4141-4151.
15. Dietrich, W. F., J. Miller, R. Steen, M. A. Merchant, D. Damron-Boles, Z. Husain, et al. 1996. A comprehensive genetic map of the mouse genome. Nature 380:149-152.
16. Drickamer, L. C., P. A. Gowaty, and C. M. Holmes 2000. Free female mate choice in house mice affects reproductive success and offspring viability and performance. Anim. Behav. 59:371-378.
17. Eccard, J. A., and J. B. W. Wolf 2009. Effects of brood size on multiple-paternity rates: a case for 'paternity share' as an offspring-based estimate. Anim. Behav. 78:563-571.
18. Engqvist, L. 2005. The mistreatment of covariate interaction terms in linear model analyses of behavioural and evolutionary ecology studies. Anim. Behav. 70:967-971.
19. Firman, R. C. 2011. Polyandrous females benefit by producing sons that achieve high reproductive success in a competitive environment. Proc. Biol. Sci. 278:2823-2831.
20. Firman, R. C., and L. W. Simmons 2008a. The frequency of multiple paternity predicts variation in testes size among island populations of house mice. J. Evol. Biol. 21:1524-1533.
21. Firman, R. C., and L. W. Simmons 2008b. Polyandry facilitates postcopulatory inbreeding avoidance in house mice. Evolution 62:603-611.
22. Firman, R. C., and L. W. Simmons 2008c. Polyandry, sperm competition, and reproductive success in mice. Behav. Ecol. 19:695-702.
23. Firman, R. C., and L. W. Simmons 2012. Male house mice evolving with post-copulatory sexual selection sire embryos with increased viability. Ecol. Lett. 15:42-46.
24. Fisher, D. O., M. C. Double, S. P. Blomberg, M. D. Jennions, and A. Cockburn 2006. Post-mating sexual selection increases lifetime fitness of polyandrous females in the wild. Nature 444:89-92.
25. Foerster, K., K. Delhey, A. Johnsen, J. T. Lifjeld, and B. Kempenaers 2003. Females increase offspring heterozygosity and fitness through extra-pair matings. Nature 425:714-717.
26. García-González, F., and L. W. Simmons 2005. The evolution of polyandry: intrinsic sire effects contribute to embryo viability. J. Evol. Biol. 18:1097-1103.
27. Grafen, A., and R. Hails, 2002. p. 351. Modern statistics for the life sciences. Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, U.K.
28. Hager, R., and R. A. Johnstone 2006. The influence of phenotypic and genetic effects on maternal provisioning and offspring weight gain in mice. Biol. Lett. 2:81-84.
29. Hoffman, J. I., J. Forcada, P. N. Trathan, and W. Amos 2007. Female fur seals show active choice for males that are heterozygous and unrelated. Nature 445:912-914.
30. Hoogland, J. L. 1998. Why do Gunnison's prairie dogs copulate with more than one male? Anim. Behav. 55:351-359.
31. Hosken, D. J., and P. Stockley 2003. Benefits of polyandry: a life history perspective. Evol. Biol. 33:173-194.
32. Hosken, D. J., T. W. J. Garner, T. Tregenza, N. Wedell, and P. I. Ward 2003. Superior sperm competitors sire higher-quality young. Proc. Biol. Sci. 270:1933-1938.
33. Hothorn, T., F. Bretz, and P. Westfall 2008. Simultaneous inference in general parametric models. Biom. J. 50:346-363.
34. Hrdy, S. B. 1979. Infanticide among animals. Ethol. Sociobiol. 1:13-40.
35. Hudson, R., and F. Trillmich 2008. Sibling competition and cooperation in mammals: challenges, developments and prospects. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 62:299-307.
36. Ilmonen, P., D. J. Penn, K. Damjanovich, J. Clarke, D. Lamborn, L. Morrison, et al. 2008. Experimental infection magnifies inbreeding depression in house mice. J. Evol. Biol. 21:834-841.
37. Jennions, M. D., and M. Petrie 2000. Why do females mate multiply? A review of the genetic benefits. Biol. Rev. 75:21-64.
38. Jones, A. G. 2005. GERUD 2.0: a computer program for the reconstruction of parental genotypes from half-sib progeny arrays with known or unknown parents. Mol. Ecol. Notes 5:708-711.
39. Keller, L., and H. K. Reeve, 1995. Why do females mate with multiple males? The sexually selected sperm hypothesis. Pp. 291-315. in P. J. B. Slater, J. S. Rosenblatt, C. T. Snowdon, M. Milinski, eds. Advances in the study of behavior. Academic Press, San Diego, CA.
40. Kempenaers, B. 2007. Mate choice and genetic quality: a review of the heterozygosity theory. Adva. Stud. Behav. 37:189-278.
41. Kempenaers, B., G. R. Verheyen, M. Van den Broeck, T. Burke, C. Van Broeckhoven, and A. A. Dhondt 1992. Extra-pair paternity results from female preference for high-quality males in the blue tit. Nature 357:494-496.
42. Klemme, I., H. Ylönen, and J. A. Eccard 2007. Reproductive success of male bank voles (Clethrionomys glareolus): the effect of operational sex ratio and body size. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 61:1911-1918.
43. Lane, J. E., S. Boutin, M. R. Gunn, J. Slate, and D. W. Coltman 2008. Female multiple mating and paternity in free-ranging North American red squirrels. Anim. Behav. 75:1927-1937.
44. Lindholm, A. K., K. Musolf, A. Weidt, and B. König 2013. Mate choice for genetic compatibility in the house mouse. Ecol. Evol. 3:1231-1247.
45. Madsen, T., R. Shine, J. Loman, and T. Håkansson 1992. Why do female adders copulate so frequently? Nature 355:440-441.
46. Magnhagen, C. 1991. Predation risk as a cost of reproduction. Trends Ecol. Evol. 6:183-186.
47. Manser, A., A. K. Lindholm, B. König, and H. C. Bagheri 2011. Polyandry and the decrease of a selfish genetic element in a wild house mouse population. Evolution 65:2435-2447.
48. Meagher, S., and W. K. Potts 1997. A microsatellite-based MHC genotyping system for house mice (Mus domesticus). Hereditas 127:75-82.
49. Meagher, S., D. J. Penn, and W. K. Potts 2000. Male-male competition magnifies inbreeding depression in wild house mice. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 97:3324-3329.
50. Mitton, J. B., W. S. F. Schuster, E. G. Cothran, and J. C. De Fries 1993. Correlation between the individual heterozygosity of parents and their offspring. Heredity 71:59-63.
51. Montero, I., M. Teschke, and D. Tautz 2013. Paternal imprinting of mating preferences between natural populations of house mice (Mus musculus domesticus). Mol. Ecol. 22:2549-2562.
52. Murie, J. O., and G. R. Michener, 1984. p. 464. The biology of ground-dwelling squirrels: annual cycles, behavioral ecology, and sociality. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, NE.
53. Narraway, C., J. Hunt, N. Wedell, and D. J. Hosken 2010. Genotype-by-environment interactions for female preference. J. Evol. Biol. 23:2550-2557.
54. Philippi, T., and J. Seger 1989. Hedging one's evolutionary bets, revisited. Trends Ecol. Evol. 4:41-44.
55. Pinheiro, J., D. Bates, S. DebRoy, and D. Sarkar, and the R Development Core team. 2012. Nlme: Linear and Nonlinear Mixed Effects Models (R Package Version 3.1-103).
56. Potts, W. K., C. J. Manning, and E. K. Wakeland 1991. Mating patterns in seminatural populations of mice influenced by MHC genotype. Nature 352:619-621.
57. R Development Core Team. 2012. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Available at http://www.R-project.org (accessed 1 December 2012).
58. Reid, J. M., P. Arcese, A. L. E. V. Cassidy, A. B. Marr, J. N. M. Smith, and L. F. Keller 2005. Hamilton and Zuk meet heterozygosity? Song repertoire size indicates inbreeding and immunity in song sparrows (Melospiza melodia). Proc. Biol. Sci. 272:481-487.
59. Richardson, D. S., J. Komdeur, and T. Burke 2004. Inbreeding in the Seychelles warbler: environment-dependent maternal effects. Evolution 58:2037-2048.
60. Rolland, C., D. W. MacDonald, M. de Fraipont, and M. Berdoy 2003. Free female choice in house mice: leaving best for last. Behaviour 140:1371-1388.
61. Saha, B. K., and S. E. Cullen 1986. Molecular mapping of murine I region recombinants: crossing over in the E beta gene. J. Immunol. 136:1112-1116.
62. Sambrook, J., E. F. Fritsch, and T. Maniatis, 1989. p. 1626. Molecular cloning. A laboratory manual, 2nd edn. Cold Spring Harbor Lab. Press, Plainview, New York.
63. Simmons, L. W. 2005. The evolution of polyandry: sperm competition, sperm selection, and offspring viability. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 36:125-146.
64. Siva-Jothy, M. T. 2006. Trauma, disease and collateral damage: conflict in cimicids. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 361:269-275.
65. Soulsbury, C. D. 2010. Genetic patterns of paternity and testes size in mammals. PLoS ONE 5:e9581.
66. Starrfelt, J., and H. Kokko 2012. Bet-hedging - a triple trade-off between means, variances and correlations. Biol. Rev. 87:742-755.
67. Stockley, P. 2003. Female multiple mating behaviour, early reproductive failure and litter size variation in mammals. Proc. Biol. Sci. 270:271-278.
68. Stockley, P., S. A. Ramm, A. L. Sherborne, M. D. F. Thom, S. Paterson, and J. L. Hurst 2013. Baculum morphology predicts reproductive success of male house mice under sexual selection. BMC Biol. 11:66.
69. Thornhill, R., and J. Alcock, 1983. p. 547. The evolution of insect mating systems. Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, MA, London.
70. Tregenza, T., and N. Wedell 1998. Benefits of multiple mates in the cricket Gryllus bimaculatus. Evolution 52:1726-1730.
71. Tregenza, T., and N. Wedell 2002. Polyandrous females avoid costs of inbreeding. Nature 415:71-73.
72. Trivers, R. L. 1972. Parental investment and sexual selection. Pp. 136-179. in B. Campbell, ed. Sexual selection and the descent of man 1871-1971. Aldine, Chicago.
73. Westneat, D. F., and I. R. K. Stewart 2003. Extra-pair paternity in birds: causes, correlates, and conflict. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 34:365-396.
74. Williams, G. C. 1975. p. 210. Sex and evolution. Princeton Univ. Press, Priceton, NJ.
75. Wolff, J. O., and D. W. Macdonald 2004. Promiscuous females protect their offspring. Trends Ecol. Evol. 19:127-134.
76. Yasui, Y. 1997. A "good-sperm" model can explain the evolution of costly multiple mating by females. Am. Nat. 149:573-584.
77. Yasui, Y. 1998. The 'genetic benefits' of female multiple mating reconsidered. Trends Ecol. Evol. 13:246-250.
78. Zeh, J. A., and D. W. Zeh 1997. The evolution of polyandry II: post-copulatory defences against genetic incompatibility. Proc. Biol. Sci. 264:69-75.