An official website of the United States government
Abstract Parentage analyses via molecular markers have revealed multiple paternity within the broods of polytocous species, reshaping our understanding of animal behavior, ecology, and evolution. In a meta‐analysis of multiple paternity in bird and mammal species, we conducted a literature search and found 138 bird and 64 mammal populations with microsatellite DNA paternity results. Bird populations averaged 19.5% multiple paternity and mammals more than twice that level (46.1%). We used a Bayesian approach to construct a null model for how multiple paternity should behave at random among species, under the assumption that all mated males have equal likelihood of siring success, given mean brood size and mean number of sires. We compared the differences between the null model and the actual probabilities of multiple paternity. While a few bird populations fell close to the null model, most did not, averaging 34.0‐percentage points below null model predictions; mammals had an average probability of multiple paternity 13.6‐percentage points below the null model. Differences between bird and mammal species were also subjected to comparative phylogenetic analyses that generally confirmed our analyses that did not adjust for estimated historical relationships. Birds exhibited extremely low probabilities of multiple paternity, not only compared to mammals but also relative to other major animal taxa. The generally low probability of multiple paternity in birds might be produced by a variety of factors, including behaviors that reflect sexual selection (extreme mate guarding or unifocal female choice) and sperm competition (e.g., precedence effects favoring fertilization by early or late matings).
more »
« less
Multiple paternity and the number of offspring: A model reveals two major groups of species
Abstract Parentage analyses via microsatellite markers have revealed multiple paternity within the broods of polytocous species of mammals, reptiles, amphibians, fishes and invertebrates. The widespread phenomenon of multiple paternity may have attending relationships with such evolutionary processes as sexual selection and kin selection. However, just how much multiple paternity should a species exhibit? We developed Bayesian null models of how multiple paternity relates to brood sizes. For each of 114 species with published data on brood sizes and numbers of sires, we compared our null model estimates to published frequencies of multiple paternity. The majority of species fell close to our null model, especially among fish and invertebrate species. Some species, however, had low probabilities of multiple paternity, far from the predictions of the null model, likely due to sexual selection and environmental constraints. We suggest a major division among species’ mating systems between those with close to random mating and high levels of multiple paternity, and those with constraints that produce low levels of multiple paternity.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2015425
- PAR ID:
- 10452136
- Publisher / Repository:
- Wiley Blackwell (John Wiley & Sons)
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- BioEssays
- Volume:
- 43
- Issue:
- 4
- ISSN:
- 0265-9247
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Abstract Extra-pair mating is common in avian species and can modulate the strength of sexual selection. Mate searching behavior of female birds may be an important predictor of mating opportunities and extra-pair mating, yet important knowledge is lacking as we have little data on fine-scale movement of females during the peak fertilization period. Accordingly, much is still unknown about whether and how female phenotypes contribute to extra-pair mating. Here, we examined how female space use and female plumage color are associated with extra-pair mating outcomes in wild barn swallows (Hirundo rustica erythrogaster). We tracked 10 females breeding in Colorado, USA with GPS backpack tags for two hours each morning during their fertile period following an experimental nest failure. We then used low-coverage whole-genome sequencing to determine offspring paternity and to quantify extra-pair mating in the removed clutch and the replacement clutch. Plumage and movement did not correlate with changes in paternity between successive clutches, but movement did correlate with paternity in the replacement clutch. Females that spent more time away from the nest had a higher proportion and number of extra-pair offspring in the clutch laid immediately after the tracking period. These results suggest that differences in female space use contribute to differences in extra-pair fertilizations. In contrast to the historic emphasis on male traits, our study highlights female movement behavior as an important variable associated with mating outcomes in natural populations.more » « less
-
Hunt, John; Ravinet, Mark (Ed.)Abstract Dispersal can evolve as an adaptation to escape competition with conspecifics or kin. Locations with a low density of conspecifics, however, may also lead to reduced opportunities for mating, especially in sessile marine invertebrates with proximity-dependent mating success. Since there are few experimental investigations, we performed a series of field experiments using an experimentally tractable species (the bryozoan Bugula neritina) to test the hypothesis that the density, spatial arrangement, and genetic relatedness of neighbours differentially affect survival, growth, reproduction, paternity, and sperm dispersal. We manipulated the density and relatedness of neighbours and found that increased density reduced survival but not growth rate, and that there was no effect of relatedness on survival, growth, or fecundity, in contrast to previous studies. We also manipulated the distances to the nearest neighbour and used genetic markers to assign paternity within known mother–offspring groups to estimate how proximity affects mating success. Distance to the nearest neighbour did not affect the number of settlers produced, the paternity share, or the degree of multiple paternity. Overall, larger than expected sperm dispersal led to high multiple paternity, regardless of the distance to the nearest neighbour. Our results have important implications for understanding selection on dispersal distance: in this system, there are few disadvantages to the limited larval dispersal that does occur and limited advantages for larvae to disperse further than a few 10s of metres.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)Abstract Background Exploring hybrid zone dynamics at different spatial scales allows for better understanding of local factors that influence hybrid zone structure. In this study, we tested hypotheses about drivers of introgression at two spatial scales within the Saltmarsh Sparrow ( Ammospiza caudacuta ) and Nelson’s Sparrow ( A. nelsoni ) hybrid zone. Specifically, we evaluated the influence of neutral demographic processes (relative species abundance), natural selection (exogenous environmental factors and genetic incompatibilities), and sexual selection (assortative mating) in this mosaic hybrid zone. By intensively sampling adults (n = 218) and chicks (n = 326) at two geographically proximate locations in the center of the hybrid zone, we determined patterns of introgression on a fine scale across sites of differing habitat. We made broadscale comparisons of patterns from the center with those of prior studies in the southern edge of the hybrid zone. Results A panel of fixed SNPs (135) identified from ddRAD sequencing was used to calculate a hybrid index and determine genotypic composition/admixture level of the populations. Another panel of polymorphic SNPs (589) was used to assign paternity and reconstruct mating pairs to test for sexual selection. On a broad-scale, patterns of introgression were not explained by random mating within marshes. We found high rates of back-crossing and similarly low rates of recent-generation (F1/F2) hybrids in the center and south of the zone. Offspring genotypic proportions did not meet those expected from random mating within the parental genotypic distribution. Additionally, we observed half as many F1/F2 hybrid female adults than nestlings, while respective male groups showed no difference, in support of Haldane’s Rule. The observed proportion of interspecific mating was lower than expected when accounting for mate availability, indicating assortative mating was limiting widespread hybridization. On a fine spatial scale, we found variation in the relative influence of neutral and selective forces between inland and coastal habitats, with the smaller, inland marsh influenced primarily by neutral demographic processes, and the expansive, coastal marsh experiencing higher selective pressures in the form of natural (exogenous and endogenous) and sexual selection. Conclusions Multiple drivers of introgression, including neutral and selective pressures (exogenous, endogenous, and sexual selection), are structuring this hybrid zone, and their relative influence is site and context-dependent.more » « less
-
BACKGROUND Charles Darwin’s Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex tackled the two main controversies arising from the Origin of Species: the evolution of humans from animal ancestors and the evolution of sexual ornaments. Most of the book focuses on the latter, Darwin’s theory of sexual selection. Research since supports his conjecture that songs, perfumes, and intricate dances evolve because they help secure mating partners. Evidence is overwhelming for a primary role of both male and female mate choice in sexual selection—not only through premating courtship but also through intimate interactions during and long after mating. But what makes one prospective mate more enticing than another? Darwin, shaped by misogyny and sexual prudery, invoked a “taste for the beautiful” without speculating on the origin of the “taste.” How to explain when the “final marriage ceremony” is between two rams? What of oral sex in bats, cloacal rubbing in bonobos, or the sexual spectrum in humans, all observable in Darwin’s time? By explaining desire through the lens of those male traits that caught his eyes and those of his gender and culture, Darwin elided these data in his theory of sexual evolution. Work since Darwin has focused on how traits and preferences coevolve. Preferences can evolve even if attractive signals only predict offspring attractiveness, but most attention has gone to the intuitive but tenuous premise that mating with gorgeous partners yields vigorous offspring. By focusing on those aspects of mating preferences that coevolve with male traits, many of Darwin’s influential followers have followed the same narrow path. The sexual selection debate in the 1980s was framed as “good genes versus runaway”: Do preferences coevolve with traits because traits predict genetic benefits, or simply because they are beautiful? To the broader world this is still the conversation. ADVANCES Even as they evolve toward ever-more-beautiful signals and healthier offspring, mate-choice mechanisms and courter traits are locked in an arms race of coercion and resistance, persuasion and skepticism. Traits favored by sexual selection often do so at the expense of chooser fitness, creating sexual conflict. Choosers then evolve preferences in response to the costs imposed by courters. Often, though, the current traits of courters tell us little about how preferences arise. Sensory systems are often tuned to nonsexual cues like food, favoring mating signals resembling those cues. And preferences can emerge simply from selection on choosing conspecifics. Sexual selection can therefore arise from chooser biases that have nothing to do with ornaments. Choice may occur before mating, as Darwin emphasized, but individuals mate multiple times and bias fertilization and offspring care toward favored partners. Mate choice can thus occur in myriad ways after mating, through behavioral, morphological, and physiological mechanisms. Like other biological traits, mating preferences vary among individuals and species along multiple dimensions. Some of this is likely adaptive, as different individuals will have different optimal mates. Indeed, mate choice may be more about choosing compatible partners than picking the “best” mate in the absolute sense. Compatibility-based choice can drive or reinforce genetic divergence and lead to speciation. The mechanisms underlying the “taste for the beautiful” determine whether mate choice accelerates or inhibits reproductive isolation. If preferences are learned from parents, or covary with ecological differences like the sensory environment, then choice can promote genetic divergence. If everyone shares preferences for attractive ornaments, then choice promotes gene flow between lineages. OUTLOOK Two major trends continue to shift the emphasis away from male “beauty” and toward how and why individuals make sexual choices. The first integrates neuroscience, genomics, and physiology. We need not limit ourselves to the feathers and dances that dazzled Darwin, which gives us a vastly richer picture of mate choice. The second is that despite persistent structural inequities in academia, a broader range of people study a broader range of questions. This new focus confirms Darwin’s insight that mate choice makes a primary contribution to sexual selection, but suggests that sexual selection is often tangential to mate choice. This conclusion challenges a persistent belief with sinister roots, whereby mate choice is all about male ornaments. Under this view, females evolve to prefer handsome males who provide healthy offspring, or alternatively, to express flighty whims for arbitrary traits. But mate-choice mechanisms also evolve for a host of other reasons Understanding mate choice mechanisms is key to understanding how sexual decisions underlie speciation and adaptation to environmental change. New theory and technology allow us to explicitly connect decision-making mechanisms with their evolutionary consequences. A century and a half after Darwin, we can shift our focus to females and males as choosers, rather than the gaudy by-products of mate choice. Mate choice mechanisms across domains of life. Sensory periphery for stimulus detection (yellow), brain for perceptual integration and evaluation (orange), and reproductive structures for postmating choice among pollen or sperm (teal). ILLUSTRATION: KELLIE HOLOSKI/ SCIENCEmore » « less
