IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v14y2003i5p679-686.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Selection for multiple mating in females due to mates that reduce female fitness

Author

Listed:
  • Patrick D. Lorch
  • Lin Chao

Abstract

If females are unable to discriminate among males before mating, remating by females that store sperm may have evolved as a hedge against having only "costly" mates (less preferred males that reduce her fitness). However, the benefit of remating is not guaranteed because she can also mate by chance with another costly male. We devised a model to explain the evolution of female remating by representing female fitness as a function of the proportion of costly mates. We examined the effect of a linear, a concave-up, and a concave-down fitness function and found that only the latter favors the evolution of female remating. With a concave-down function, females mating with 50% costly mates have nearly the same fitness as do females with none. A biological interpretation for a concave-down function is that sperm from good males are better at competing with sperm from costly males or are more preferred by females. A concave-up function implies the reverse, whereas a linear function will occur when sperm are equally competitive. We review specific situations in nature that might produce a concave-down function and find evidence that sterility and intragenomic conflict are two phenomena capable of driving the evolution of female remating by our model. Copyright 2003.

Suggested Citation

  • Patrick D. Lorch & Lin Chao, 2003. "Selection for multiple mating in females due to mates that reduce female fitness," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 14(5), pages 679-686, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:14:y:2003:i:5:p:679-686
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/arg045
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:14:y:2003:i:5:p:679-686. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/beheco .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.