Skip to main content
Log in

Wild yellow dung fly females may not select sperm based on dung pat microclimate but could nevertheless benefit from polyandry

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Evolutionary Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Molecular techniques have substantially improved our knowledge of postcopulatory sexual selection. Nevertheless, studies examining sperm utilization in natural populations of nonsocial insects are rare, support for sperm selection (biased use of stored sperm, e.g. to match offspring genotypes to prevailing environmental conditions) is elusive, and its relevance within natural populations unknown. We performed an oviposition site choice experiment in the field where female yellow dung flies Scathophaga stercoraria could deposit eggs into three different microenvironments on a dung pat (the east–west ridge, north- or south-exposed side), and genotyped the offspring and sperm remaining in storage after oviposition. Females exhibited plasticity in the number of eggs deposited according to pat age. Additionally, temperature strongly influenced egg placement: the warmer the temperature, the higher the proportion of eggs laid into the north-exposed side of dung. The number of ejaculates in storage differed amongst spermathecae, and females stored sperm from more males than fathered their offspring (2.11 sires vs. 2.84 males within sperm stores). Mean last male paternity was 83.4%, roughly matching previous laboratory estimates. Importantly, we found no evidence that females selectively lay eggs of different genotypes, by biasing paternity towards certain males, depending on offspring’s microclimate. Thus, while we show female choice over number of eggs and where these are deposited, there was no evidence for sperm selection. We further revealed positive effects of multiple mating on total number of offspring and proportion of offspring emerging from the dung. We argue that the integration of field studies and laboratory experiments is essential to promote our understanding of polyandry and cryptic female choice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Arnqvist G, Rowe L (2005) Sexual conflict. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Bateman AJ (1948) Intra-sexual selection in Drosophila. Heredity 2:349–368

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bates D, Maechler M (2008) Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. http://lme4.r-forge.r-project.org/

  • Birkhead TR, Pizzari T (2002) Postcopulatory sexual selection. Nat Rev Genet 3:262–273

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Birkhead TR, Hosken DJ, Pitnick S (2009) Sperm biology: an evolutionary perspective. Academic Press, San Diego

    Google Scholar 

  • Bretman A, Tregenza T (2005) Measuring polyandry in wild populations: a case study using promiscuous crickets. Mol Ecol 14:2169–2179

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bussière LF, Demont M, Pemberton AJ, Hall MD, Ward PI (2010) The assessment of insemination success in yellow dung flies using competitive PCR. Mol Ecol Res 10:292–303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cobbs G (1977) Multiple insemination and male sexual selection in natural-populations of Drosophila pseudoobscura. Am Nat 111:641–656

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crawley MJ (2007) The R Book. Wiley, West Sussex

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Demont M (2010) Polyandry and postcopulatory sexual selection in yellow dung flies. PhD Thesis, University of Zurich, Zurich

  • Demont M, Blanckenhorn WU, Hosken DJ, Garner TWJ (2008) Molecular and quantitative genetic differentiation across Europe in yellow dung flies. J Evol Biol 21:1492–1503

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Demont M, Buser CC, Martin OY, Bussière LF (2011) Natural levels of polyandry: differential sperm storage and temporal changes in sperm competition intensity in wild yellow dung flies. Funct Ecol 25:1079–1090

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eberhard WG (1996) Female control: sexual selection by cryptic female choice. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher DO, Double MC, Blomberg SP, Jennions MD, Cockburn A (2006) Post-mating sexual selection increases lifetime fitness of polyandrous females in the wild. Nature 444:89–92

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Garner TWJ, Brinkmann H, Gerlach G, Meyer A, Ward PI, Sporri M, Hosken DJ (2000) Polymorphic DNA microsatellites identified in the yellow dung fly (Scathophaga stercoraria). Mol Ecol 9:2207–2208

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hall MD, Bussière LF, Demont M, Ward PI, Brooks RC (2010) Competitive PCR reveals the complexity of postcopulatory sexual selection in Teleogryllus commodus. Mol Ecol 19:610–619

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hellriegel B, Bernasconi G (2000) Female-mediated differential sperm storage in a fly with complex spermathecae, Scatophaga stercoraria. Anim Behav 59:311–317

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hellriegel B, Ward PI (1998) Complex female reproductive tract morphology: its possible use in postcopulatory female choice. J Theor Biol 190:179–186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hosken DJ (2001) Sex and death: microevolutionary trade-offs between reproductive and immune investment in dung flies. Curr Biol 11:R379–R380

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hosken DJ, Ward PI (2001) Experimental evidence for testis size evolution via sperm competition. Ecol Lett 4:10–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hosken DJ, Meyer EP, Ward PI (1999) Internal female reproductive anatomy and genital interactions during copula in the yellow dung fly, Scathophaga stercoraria (Diptera: Scathophagidae). Can J Zool-Rev Can Zool 77:1975–1983

    Google Scholar 

  • Hosken DJ, Garner TWJ, Ward PI (2001) Sexual conflict selects for male and female reproductive characters. Curr Biol 11:489–493

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hosken DJ, Uhia E, Ward PI (2002) The function of female accessory reproductive gland secretion and a cost to polyandry in the yellow dung fly. Physiol Entomol 27:87–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hosken DJ, Garner TWJ, Tregenza T, Wedell N, Ward PI (2003) Superior sperm competitors sire higher-quality young. Proc R Soc Lond Ser B 270:1933–1938

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jann P, Blanckenhorn WU, Ward PI (2000) Temporal and microspatial variation in the intensities of natural and sexual selection in the yellow dung fly Scathophaga stercoraria. J Evol Biol 13:927–938

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones AG (2001) GERUD1.0: a computer program for the reconstruction of parental genotypes from progeny arrays using multilocus DNA data. Mol Ecol Notes 1:215–218

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • LaMunyon CW (1994) Paternity in naturally-occurring Utetheisa ornatrix (Lepidoptera, Arctiidae) as estimated using enzyme polymorphism. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 34:403–408

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Landin B (1967) On the relationship between microclimate in cow droppings and some species of Sphaeridium (Col. Hydrophilidae). Opus Entomol 32:277–312

    Google Scholar 

  • Madsen T, Shine R, Loman J, Hakansson T (1992) Why do female adders copulate so frequently? Nature 355:440–441

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin OY, Hosken DJ, Ward PI (2004) Post-copulatory sexual selection and female fitness in Scathophaga stercoraria. Proc R Soc Lond Ser B 271:353–359

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker GA (1970a) Sperm competition and its evolutionary consequences in insects. Biol Rev Cambridge Philosophic Soc 45:525–567

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker GA (1970b) The reproductive behavior and the nature of sexual selection in Scatophaga stercoraria L. (Diptera: Scatophagidae). VII. The origin and evolution of the passive phase. Evolution 24:774–788

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Price TAR, Hodgson DJ, Lewis Z, Hurst GDD, Wedell N (2008) Selfish genetic elements promote polyandry in a fly. Science 322:1241–1243

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • R Development Core Team (2008) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. http://www.R-project.org

  • Rodriguez-Muñoz R, Bretman A, Slate J, Walling CA, Tregenza T (2010) Natural and sexual selection in a wild insect population. Science 328:1269–1272

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Simmons LW (2001) Sperm competition and its evolutionary consequences in the insects. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Simmons LW (2005) The evolution of polyandry: sperm competition, sperm selection, and offspring viability. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 36:125–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simmons LW, Beveridge M (2010) The strength of postcopulatory sexual selection within natural populations of field crickets. Behav Ecol 21:1179–1185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simmons LW, Siva-Jothy MT (1998) Sperm competition in insects: mechanisms and the potential for selection. In: Birkhead TR, Moller AP (eds) Sperm competition and sexual selection. Academic Press, London, pp 341–434

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Simmons LW, Beveridge M, Kennington WJ (2007) Polyandry in the wild: temporal changes in female mating frequency and sperm competition intensity in natural populations of the tettigoniid Requena verticalis. Mol Ecol 16:4613–4623

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Snook RR (2005) Sperm in competition: not playing by the numbers. Trends Ecol Evol 20:46–53

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tregenza T, Wedell N (2000) Genetic compatibility, mate choice and patterns of parentage: invited review. Mol Ecol 9:1013–1027

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tregenza T, Wedell N (2002) Polyandrous females avoid costs of inbreeding. Nature 415:71–73

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tregenza T, Wedell N, Hosken DJ, Ward PI (2003) Maternal effects on offspring depend on female mating pattern and offspring environment in yellow dung flies. Evolution 57:297–304

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tripet F, Toure YT, Taylor CE, Norris DE, Dolo G, Lanzaro GC (2001) DNA analysis of transferred sperm reveals significant levels of gene flow between molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae. Mol Ecol 10:1725–1732

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ward PI (1998) A possible explanation for cryptic female choice in the yellow dung fly, Scathophaga stercoraria (L.). Ethology 104:97–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward PI (2000) Cryptic female choice in the yellow dung fly Scathophaga stercoraria (L.). Evolution 54:1680–1686

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ward PI, Simmons LW (1990) Short-term changes in numbers of the yellow dung fly Scathophaga stercoraria (Diptera, Scathophagidae). Ecol Entomol 15:115–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward PI, Foglia M, Blanckenhorn WU (1999) Oviposition site choice in the yellow dung fly Scathophaga stercoraria. Ethology 105:423–430

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward PI, Vonwil J, Scholte EJ, Knop E (2002) Field experiments on the distributions of eggs of different phosphoglucomutase (PGM) genotypes in the yellow dung fly Scathophaga stercoraria (L.). Mol Ecol 11:1781–1785

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zeh JA, Zeh DW (1994) Last-male sperm precedence breaks down when females mate with 3 males. Proc R Soc Lond Ser B 257:287–292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeh JA, Zeh DW (2006) Outbred embryos rescue inbred half-siblings in mixed-paternity broods of live-bearing females. Nature 439:201–203

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank two anonymous reviewers for their very helpful comments on the manuscript. We thank Wolf Blanckenhorn, Tony Wilson, and Erik Postma for discussions on statistical analyses and for valuable comments on the manuscript. Thanks also to Claudia Buser for help with dissections and Yves Choffat for help with genotyping the offspring. This work was funded by the University of Zurich and by a grant from the Claraz-Stiftung to MD. OYM was supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation SNF (Ambizione grant PZ00P3_121777/1 & research grant 31003A_125144/1). LFB was supported by the University of Stirling.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marco Demont.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Demont, M., Martin, O.Y. & Bussière, L.F. Wild yellow dung fly females may not select sperm based on dung pat microclimate but could nevertheless benefit from polyandry. Evol Ecol 26, 715–731 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10682-011-9519-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10682-011-9519-1

Keywords

Navigation