IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v23y2012i4p815-819..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Males responding to sperm competition cues have higher fertilization success in a soldier fly

Author

Listed:
  • Flavia Barbosa

Abstract

Sperm competition has been demonstrated to be an important force shaping male behavior in a number of species. For example, males may prolong copulation duration when they perceive sperm competition to be high. Although male behavioral responses to sperm competition have been shown in several species, their effects on reproductive success have rarely been demonstrated. In the soldier fly Merosargus cingulatus, males prolong copulations when sperm competition is high and when mating with more fecund females. Here, I tested the hypothesis that this behavioral response results in higher reproductive success for males. I exposed males to different simulated levels of sperm competition (high or low male density at the oviposition site) then introduced a female. I allowed the pair to mate and the female to oviposit. I determined the percentage of offspring sired by the male using amplified fragment length polymorphism profiles. Sperm competition did not affect clutch size, but it did affect fertilization success: males under higher simulated sperm competition increased copulation duration and fertilized a higher percentage of a female's egg clutch than did males under lower sperm competition.

Suggested Citation

  • Flavia Barbosa, 2012. "Males responding to sperm competition cues have higher fertilization success in a soldier fly," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 23(4), pages 815-819.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:23:y:2012:i:4:p:815-819.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/ars035
    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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Flavia Barbosa, 2011. "Copulation duration in the soldier fly: the roles of cryptic male choice and sperm competition risk," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 22(6), pages 1332-1336.
    2. Douglas W. Tallamy & Bradford E. Powell & Julie A. McClafferty, 2002. "Male traits under cryptic female choice in the spotted cucumber beetle (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae)," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 13(4), pages 511-518, July.
    3. Steven A. Ramm & Paula Stockley, 2007. "Ejaculate allocation under varying sperm competition risk in the house mouse, Mus musculus domesticus," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 18(2), pages 491-495.
    4. Flavia Barbosa, 2009. "Cryptic female choice by female control of oviposition timing in a soldier fly," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 20(5), pages 957-960.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Brian Gray & Leigh W. Simmons, 2013. "Acoustic cues alter perceived sperm competition risk in the field cricket Teleogryllus oceanicus," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 24(4), pages 982-986.
    2. Martina Magris & Gianluca Chimetto & Sofia Rizzi & Andrea Pilastro, 2018. "Quick-change artists: male guppies pay no cost to repeatedly adjust their sexual strategies," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 29(5), pages 1113-1123.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Brian Gray & Leigh W. Simmons, 2013. "Acoustic cues alter perceived sperm competition risk in the field cricket Teleogryllus oceanicus," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 24(4), pages 982-986.

    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:23:y:2012:i:4:p:815-819.. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.