Variation in pre- and post-copulatory sexual selection on male genital size in two species of lygaeid bug

Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

Volumn 70, Issue 4, 2016, Pages 625-637

  Dougherty, Liam R ^a,b   Shuker, David M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ST ANDREWS   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA   (Australia)

Author keywords

Genital evolution; Lygaeinae; Meta analysis; Post copulatory; Pre copulatory; Sexual selection; Social environment

Indexed keywords

COMPLEXITY; COPULATION; CORRELATION; ESTIMATION METHOD; EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY; EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; INSECT; MATING SUCCESS; META-ANALYSIS; REPRODUCTIVE ISOLATION; SEXUAL SELECTION;

ANIMALIA; LYGAEIDAE; LYGAEINAE; LYGAEUS EQUESTRIS; LYGAEUS SIMULANS;

EID: 84961061931     PISSN: 03405443     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00265-016-2082-6     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Arnold SJ, Wade MJ (1984) On the measurement of natural and sexual selection: applications. Evolution 38:720–734
2. Arnqvist G (1997) The evolution of animal genitalia: distinguishing between hypotheses by single species studies. Biol J Linn Soc 60:365–379
3. Bonduriansky R, Rowe L (2003) Interactions among mechanisms of sexual selection on male body size and head shape in a sexually dimorphic fly. Evolution 57:2046–2053
4. Burdfield-Steel ER, Dougherty LR, Smith LA, Collins LA, Shuker DM (2013) Variation in social and sexual behaviour in four species of aposematic seed bugs (Hemiptera: Lygaeidae): the role of toxic and non-toxic food. Behav Process 99:52–61
5. Danielsson I (2001) Antagonistic pre–and post–copulatory sexual selection on male body size in a water strider (Gerris lacustris). P Roy Soc Lond B 268:77–81.
6. Deckert J (1985) Über Lygaeus simulans spec. nov. und L. equestris (Linnaeus, 1758), zwei nahe verwandte paläarktische Lygaeinae (Heteroptera, Lygaeidae). Mitteilungen aus dem Museum für Naturkunde in Berlin Zoologisches Museum und Institut für Spezielle Zoologie (Berlin) 61:273–278
7. Dougherty LR, Shuker DM (2014) Pre-copulatory sexual selection in the seed bug Lygaeus equestris: a comparison of choice and no-choice paradigms. Anim Behav 89:207–214
8. Dougherty LR, Shuker DM (2015a) The effect of experimental design on the measurement of mate choice: a meta-analysis. Behav Ecol 26:311–319
9. Dougherty LR, Shuker DM (2015b) Natural breakage of the very long intromittent organ of the seed bug Lygaeus simulans. Eur J Entomol 112:818–823.
10. Dougherty LR, Rahman IA, Burdfield-Steel ER, Greenway EV, Shuker DM (2015) Experimental reduction of intromittent organ length reduces male reproductive success in a bug. Proc R Soc Lond B 282:201507824
11. Eberhard WG (1985) Sexual selection and animal genitalia. Harvard University Press
12. Eberhard W (1996) Female control: sexual selection by cryptic female choice. Princeton University Press, Princeton
13. Emlen DJ (2008) The evolution of animal weapons. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 39:387–413
14. Frazee SR, Masly JP (2015) Multiple sexual selection pressures drive the rapid evolution of complex morphology in a male secondary genital structure. Ecol Evol 5:4437–4450
15. Gack C, Peschke K (2005) “Shouldering” exaggerated genitalia: a unique behavioural adaptation for the retraction of the elongate intromittent organ by the male rove beetle (Aleochara tristis Gravenhorst). Biol J Linn Soc 84:307–312
16. Gasparini C, Pilastro A, Evans JP (2011) Male genital morphology and its influence on female mating preferences and paternity success in guppies. PLoS One 6:e22329
17. Greenway EG, Shuker DM (2015) The repeatability of mating failure in a polyandrous bug. J Evolution Biol 28:1578–1582.
18. Grieshop K, Polak M (2012) The precopulatory function of male genital spines in Drosophila ananassae [Doleschall] (Diptera: Drosophilidae) revealed by laser surgery. Evolution 66:2637–2645
19. Gschwentner R, Tadler A (2000) Functional anatomy of the spermatheca and its duct in the seed bug Lygaeus simulans (Heteroptera: Lygaeidae). Eur J Entomol 97:305–312
20. Higgins J, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG (2003) Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. Br Med J 327:557–560
21. Higgins SL, Hosken DJ, Wedell N (2009) Phenotypic and genetic variation in male genitalia in the seedbug, Lygaeus equestris (Heteroptera). Biol J Linn Soc 98:400–405
22. Hosken DJ, Stockley P (2004) Sexual selection and genital evolution. Trends Ecol Evol 19:87–93
23. House CM, Lewis Z, Hodgson DJ, Wedell N, Sharma MD, Hunt J, Hosken DJ (2013) Sexual and natural selection both influence male genital evolution. Plos One 8:e63807
24. Hunt J, Breuker CJ, Sadowski JA, Moore AJ (2009) Male–male competition, female mate choice and their interaction: determining total sexual selection. J Evol Biol 22:13–26
25. Kahn AT, Mautz B, Jennions MD (2009) Females prefer to associate with males with longer intromittent organs in mosquitofish. Biol Lett rsbl20090637.
26. Kamimura Y (2005) Last-male paternity of Euborellia plebeja, an earwig with elongated genitalia and sperm-removal behavior. J Ethol 23:35–41
27. Kelly CD, Jennions MD (2011) Sexual selection and sperm quantity: meta-analyses of strategic ejaculation. Biol Rev 86:863–884
28. Kingsolver JG, Hoekstra HE, Hoekstra JM, Berrigan D, Vignieri SN, Hill CE, Hoang A, Gibert P, Beerli P (2001) The strength of phenotypic selection in natural populations. Am Nat 157:245–261
29. Kingsolver JG, Diamond SE, Siepielski AM, Carlson SM (2012) Synthetic analyses of phenotypic selection in natural populations: lessons, limitations and future directions. Evol Ecol 26:1101–1118
30. Kvarnemo C, Simmons LW (2013) Polyandry as a mediator of sexual selection before and after mating. Philos Trans R Soc B 368:20120042
31. Lande R, Arnold SJ (1983) The measurement of selection on correlated characters. Evolution 37:1210–1226
32. Lessells C, Boag PT (1987) Unrepeatable repeatabilities: a common mistake. Auk 104:116–121
33. LeVasseur‐Viens H, Polak M, Moehring AJ (2015) No evidence for external genital morphology affecting cryptic female choice and reproductive isolation in Drosophila. Evolution 69:1797–1807
34. Ludwig W (1926) Untersuchungen über den Copulationsapparat der Baumwanzen. Zoomorphology 5:291–380
35. Micholitsch T, Krugel P, Pass G (2000) Insemination and fertilization in the seed bug Lygaeus simulans (Heteroptera: Lygaeidae). Eur J Entomol 97:13–18
36. Miller CW, Svensson EI (2014) Sexual selection in complex environments. Annu Rev Entomol 59:427–445
37. Morrissey MB, Hadfield JD (2011) Directional selection in temporally replicated studies is remarkably consistent. Evolution 66:435–442
38. Morrissey MB, Sakrejda K (2013) Unification of regression-based methods for the analysis of natural selection. Evolution 67:2094–2100
39. Nakagawa S, Santos ES (2012) Methodological issues and advances in biological meta-analysis. Evol Ecol 26:1253–1274
40. Pélissié B, Jarne P, Sarda V, David P (2014) Disentangling precopulatory and postcopulatory sexual selection in polyandrous species. Evolution 68:1320–1331
41. R Development Core Team (2014) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna
42. Rodriguez V (1995) Relation of flagellum length to reproductive success in male Chelymorpha alternans Boheman (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae: Cassidinae). Coleopt Bull 49:201–205
43. Rodriguez V, Windsor D, Eberhard W (2004) Tortoise beetle genitalia and demonstrations of a sexually selected advantage for flagellum length in Chelymorpha alternans (Chrysomelidae, Cassidini, Stolaini). In: Jolivet P, Santiago-Blay JA, Schmitt M (eds) New developments in the biology of Chrysomelidae. SPB Academic Publishing, The Hague, pp 739–748
44. Schluter D (1988) Estimating the form of natural selection on a quantitative trait. Evolution 42:849–861
45. Shuker DM, Ballantyne GA, Wedell N (2006) Variation in the cost to females of the sexual conflict over mating in the seed bug, Lygaeus equestris. Anim Behav 72:313–321
46. Sillén-Tullberg B (1981) Prolonged copulation: a male “postcopulatory” strategy in a promiscuous species, Lygaeus equestris (Heteroptera: Lygaeidae). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 9:283–289
47. Simmons LW (2014) Sexual selection and genital evolution. Aust Entomol 53:1–17
48. Simmons LW, House CM, Hunt J, García-González F (2009) Evolutionary response to sexual selection in male genital morphology. Curr Biol 19:1442–1446
49. Solbreck C (1972) Sexual cycle, and changes in feeding activity and fat body size in relation to migration in Lygaeus equestris (L.) (Heteroptera, Lygaeidae). Insect Syst Evol 3:267–274
50. Tadler A (1999) Selection of a conspicuous male genitalic trait in the seedbug Lygaeus simulans. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol 266:1773–1777
51. Tadler A, Nemeschkal HL, Pass G (1999) Selection of male traits during and after copulation in the seedbug Lygaeus simulans (Heteroptera, Lygaeidae). Biol J Linn Soc 68:471–483
52. Van Lieshout E, Elgar MA (2011) Longer exaggerated male genitalia confer defensive sperm-competitive benefits in an earwig. Evol Ecol 25:351–362
53. Viechtbauer W (2010) Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. J Stat Softw 36:1–48
54. Wagner WE (1998) Measuring female mating preferences. Anim Behav 55:1029–1042
55. Xu J, Wang Q (2010) Form and nature of precopulatory sexual selection in both sexes of a moth. Naturwissenschaften 97:617–625
56. Young MJ, Simmons LW, Evans JP (2010) Pre- and post-mating sexual selection both favor large males in a rainbow fish. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 64:915–925