Conspecific sperm precedence does not work as a barrier against reproductive interference

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Noriyuki Suzuki
Keyword(s):  
Reproductive Interference ◽  
Sperm Precedence

scholarly journals Reproductive interference hampers species coexistence despite conspecific sperm precedence

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryosuke Iritani ◽  
Suzuki Noriyuki
Keyword(s):  
Mathematical Model ◽  
Related Species ◽  
Species Coexistence ◽  
Niche Partitioning ◽  
Reproductive Interference ◽  
Food Sources ◽  
Comparative Approach ◽  
Sperm Precedence ◽  
Interspecific Mating ◽  
Closely Related Species

AbstractNegative interspecific mating interactions, known as reproductive interference, can hamper species coexistence in a local patch and promote niche partitioning or geographical segregation of closely related species. Conspecific sperm precedence (CSP), which occurs when females that have mated with both conspecific and heterospecific males preferentially use conspecific sperm for fertilization, might contribute to species coexistence by mitigating the costs of interspecific mating and hybridization. We examined whether two closely related species exhibiting CSP can coexist in a local environment in the presence of reproductive interference. First, using a behaviourally explicit mathematical model, we demonstrated that two species characterized by negative mating interactions are unlikely to coexist because the costs of reproductive interference, such as loss of mating opportunity with conspecific partners, are inevitably incurred when individuals of both species are present. Second, we experimentally demonstrated differences in mating activity and preference in twoHarmonialadybird species known to exhibit CSP. According to the developed mathematical model of reproductive interference, these behavioural differences should lead to local extinction ofH. yedoensisbecause of reproductive interference byH. axyridis. This prediction is consistent with field observations thatH. axyridisuses various food sources and habitats whereasH. yedoensisis confined to a less preferred prey item and a pine tree habitat. Finally, by a comparative approach, we showed that niche partitioning or parapatric distribution, but not sympatric coexistence in the same habitat, is maintained between species with CSP belonging to a wide range of taxa, including vertebrates and invertebrates living in aquatic or terrestrial environments. Taken together, these results lead us to conclude that reproductive interference generally destabilizes local coexistence even in closely related species that exhibit CSP.

scholarly journals Sperm Competition in the Absence of Fertilization in Caenorhabditis elegans

Genetics ◽  
1999 ◽  
Vol 152 (1) ◽  
pp. 201-208 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Singson ◽  
Katherine L Hill ◽  
Steven W L’Hernault
Keyword(s):  
Caenorhabditis Elegans ◽  
Sperm Competition ◽  
Sperm Function ◽  
Sperm Precedence ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
Nematode Caenorhabditis Elegans ◽  
C Elegans ◽  
Normal Sperm ◽  
Self Fertilization ◽  
Competition Assays

Abstract Hermaphrodite self-fertilization is the primary mode of reproduction in the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans. However, when a hermaphrodite is crossed with a male, nearly all of the oocytes are fertilized by male-derived sperm. This sperm precedence during reproduction is due to the competitive superiority of male-derived sperm and results in a functional suppression of hermaphrodite self-fertility. In this study, mutant males that inseminate fertilization-defective sperm were used to reveal that sperm competition within a hermaphrodite does not require successful fertilization. However, sperm competition does require normal sperm motility. Additionally, sperm competition is not an absolute process because oocytes not fertilized by male-derived sperm can sometimes be fertilized by hermaphrodite-derived sperm. These results indicate that outcrossed progeny result from a wild-type cross because male-derived sperm are competitively superior and hermaphrodite-derived sperm become unavailable to oocytes. The sperm competition assays described in this study will be useful in further classifying the large number of currently identified mutations that alter sperm function and development in C. elegans.

An indirect approach to study sperm precedence in a subsocial spider

2010 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 295-304 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. Lorieto ◽  
S. Ghione ◽  
C. Viera
Keyword(s):  
Sperm Precedence ◽  
Indirect Approach

Male and female effects on sperm precedence in the giant sperm species Drosophila bifurca

Genetica ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 130 (3) ◽  
pp. 257-265 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nathalie Luck ◽  
Béatrice Dejonghe ◽  
Stéphane Fruchard ◽  
Sophie Huguenin ◽  
Dominique Joly
Keyword(s):  
Sperm Precedence ◽  
Male And Female

Conspecific Sperm Precedence is an Effective Barrier to Hybridization Between Closely Related Species

Evolution ◽  
1998 ◽  
Vol 52 (2) ◽  
pp. 511 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel J. Howard ◽  
Pamela G. Gregory ◽  
Jiming Chu ◽  
Michael L. Cain
Keyword(s):  
Related Species ◽  
Sperm Precedence ◽  
Closely Related Species ◽  
Effective Barrier

Temporal Variation in Male Copulatory Behaviour in the Solitary Bee Nomadopsis Puellae (Hymenoptera: Andrenidae)

Behaviour ◽  
1980 ◽  
Vol 73 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 175-187 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronald L. Rutowski ◽  
John Alcock
Keyword(s):  
Alternative Hypothesis ◽  
Sperm Precedence ◽  
Solitary Bee ◽  
Limited Data ◽  
Single Female ◽  
Mating Period ◽  
Duration Of Copulation ◽  
High Degree ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Copulatory Behaviour

Abstract1. Females of the solitary bee, Nomadopsis puellae, foraging for pollen at flowers will copulate with any male that can reach them but the duration of copulation is not constant over the daily foraging-mating period (which lasts from about 0900-1300). Early on, copulations are brief (usually less than 1 min). As the morning progresses, males tend not to release their mates spontaneously but remain in copula for as long as it takes a female to collect a full pollen load and return to her nest. In addition, late in the mating period males that have not secured a single female may begin to assault pairs in attempts to usurp a female from a copulating male. 2. We propose that males control the duration of mating in ways that reflect a change in the genetic gains associated with brief versus prolonged copulations over the course of the morning. We assume that sperm precedence occurs in this species and that females are more likely to oviposit at the end of the foraging period than at the beginning. If these assumptions are correct, guarding a mate through prolonged copulation could become increasingly advantageous as the mating period draws to a close each day. Given a high degree of competition for mates, a male that secured a female on her last trip of the morning could greatly improve the chance that his mate would use his sperm for fertilization if he prevented other males from reaching her until she was safely back inside her nest burrow. 3. An alternative hypothesis that the variation in copulation length is due to changes in the readiness of females to receive sperm from a male over the mating period is considered. Limited data suggest that females do not signal degrees of sperm receptivity to males. Males probably determine how long they will copulate, switching from the tactic of securing many short (unguarded) copulations to a few lengthy (guarded) matings in the course of a morning.

scholarly journals The mating rate of Drosophila suzukii reduction due to reproductive interference from Drosophila melanogaster

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yongzhuo Chen ◽  
Min Zhang ◽  
Wei Hu ◽  
Jing Li ◽  
Pengcheng Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Drosophila Melanogaster ◽  
Interspecific Competition ◽  
Population Size ◽  
Egg Laying ◽  
Significant Decline ◽  
Reproductive Interference ◽  
Drosophila Suzukii ◽  
Offspring Number ◽  
Successful Mating ◽  
Reproductive Activities

Abstract Background Drosophila suzukii is widely distributed. Research has revealed that the presence of Drosophila melanogaster can reduce the emergence and egg laying of D. suzukii. However, the reasons for these phenomena have not yet been reported. To investigate this issue, we sought to answer three questions: Can the presence of D. melanogaster reduce the longevity of D. suzukii? Does D. melanogaster dominate in larval interspecific competition with D. suzukii? Does reproductive interference occur between these species; i.e., do individuals of one species (e.g., D. suzukii) engage in reproductive activities with individuals of the other (e.g., D. melanogaster) such that the fitness of one or both species is reduced? Results The results showed that the adult offspring number of Drosophila suzukii was significantly reduced when this species was reared with Drosophila melanogaster. The larval interspecific competition had no significant effects on Drosophila suzukii longevity or population size. Surprisingly, Drosophila melanogaster imposed reproductive interference on males of Drosophila suzukii, which led to a significant decline in the rate of successful mating of the latter species. Conclusions The presence of Drosophila melanogaster causes the population size of Drosophila suzukii to decrease through reproductive interference, and the rate of successful mating in Drosophila suzukii is significantly reduced in the presence of Drosophila melanogaster.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document