Skip to main content
Log in

Why do females have so few extra-pair offspring?

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

It is generally accepted that if a female can improve her offspring’s genetics via extra-pair copulations (EPC), it is by copulating with extra-pair males whose phenotypes are more superior or whose genes are more compatible to hers than those of her bonded male. Here, we present a model that puts together uncertainties about the male genetic quality, a postcopulatory sperm bias in favor of the better or the more compatible genes, and costs that females pay by being choosy about extra-pair male quality. The model’s conclusions challenge traditional views of good genes explanations of EPC. When phenotypes give incomplete information about genotypes, a female choosing a phenotypically superior extra-pair male, may nevertheless find herself trading good genes of a bonded male for poor genes of an extra-pair male. Such “unfortunate sperm replacements” can limit the female involvement in EPC even when EPC are otherwise cost-free. The model also shows that even a female bonded to a phenotypically superior male may benefit by EPC, provided that sperm competition is biased toward sperm with more fit or more compatible genes. Furthermore, if choosiness is sufficiently costly, a female may even do best by copulating with a random extra-pair male.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Akçay E, Roughgarden J (2007) Extra-pair paternity in birds: review of the genetic benefits. Evol Ecol Res 9:855–868

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnqvist G, Kirkpatrick M (2005) The evolution of infidelity in socially monogamous passerines: the strength of direct and indirect selection on extrapair copulation behaviour in females. Am Nat 165:S26–S37

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ball MA, Parker GA (2003) Sperm competition games: sperm selection by females. J Theor Biol 224:27–42

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brommer JE, Korsten P, Bouwman KM, Berg ML, Domdeur J (2007) Is extrapair mating random? On the probability distribution of extrapair young in avian broods. Behav Ecol 18:895–904

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks R, Kemp DJ (2001) Can older males deliver the good genes? TREE 16:308–313

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dominey WR (1984) Altarnative mating tactics and evolutionarily stable strategies. Am Zool 24:385–396

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans JP, Zane L, Francescato S, Pilastro A (2003) Directional postcopulatory sexual selection revealed by artificial insemination. Nature 421:360–363

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Eliassen S, Kokko H (2008) Current analyses do not resolve whether extra-pair paternity is male or female driven. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 62:1795–1804

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher RA (1930) The genetical theory of natural selection. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Foerster K, Valcu M, Johnsen A (2006) A spatial genetic structure and effects of relatedness on mate choice in a wild bird population. Mol Ecol 15:4555–4567

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fromhage L, Kokko H, Reid JM (2009) Evolution of mate choice for genome-wide heterzygosity. Evolution 63:684–694

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gowaty PA (1996) Battles of the sexes and origins of monogamy. In: Black JM (ed) Partnerships in birds: the study of monogamy. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 21–52

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffith SC (2007) The evolution of infidelity in socially monogamous passerines: neglected components of direct and indirect selection. Am Nat 169:274–281

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Griffith SC, Owens IPF, Thuman KA (2002) Extra pair paternity in birds: a review of interspecific variation and adaptive function. Mol Ecol 11:2195–2212

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen TF, Price DK (1995) Good genes and old age: do old mates provide superior genes? J Evol Biol 8:759–778

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hasson O, Stone L (2009) Male infertility, female fertility and extrapair copulations. Biol Rev 84:225–244

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hardy OJ (2003) Estimation of pairwise relatedness between individuals and characterization of isolation-by-distance process using dominant genetic markers. Mol Ecol 12:1577–1588

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Higginson AD, Reader T (2009) Environmental heterogeneity, genotype-environment interactions and the reliability of sexual traits as indicators of mate quality. Proc R Soc B 276:1153–1159

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Howard DJ (1999) Conspecific sperm and pollen precedence and speciation. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 30:109–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirkpatrick M (1986) The handicap mechanism of sexual selection does not work. Am Nat 127:222–240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kokko H (1998) Good genes, old age and lifehistory trade-offs. Evol Ecol 12:739–750

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kokko H (1999) Kuckoldry and the stability of biparental care. Ecol Lett 2:247–255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kokko H, Heubel K (2008) Condition-dependence, genotype-by-environment interactions and the lek paradox. Genetica 132:209–216

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lehmann L, Keller LF, Kokko H (2007) Mate choice evolution, dominance effects, and the maintenance of genetic variations. J Theor Biol 244:282–295

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Locatello L, Rasotto MB, Evans JP, Pilastro A (2006) Colourful male guppies produce faster and more viable sperm. J Evol Biol 19:1595–1602

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Marshall J, McNamara J, Houston A (2010) The state of Darwinian theory. Behav Ecol Soc. doi:10.1007/s00265-010-1121-y

  • Maynard Smith J, Harper DGC (1995) Animal signals: models and terminology. J Theor Biol 177:305–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mays HL Jr, Albrecht T, Liu M, Hill GE (2008) Female choice for genetic complementary in birds: a review. Genetica 134:147–158

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Neff BD, Pitcher TE (2005) Genetic quality and sexual selection: an integrated framework for good genes and compatible genes. Mol Ecol 14:19–38

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Penn DJ (2009) The scent of genetic compatibility: sexual selection and the major histocompatibility complex. Ethology 108:1–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petrie M, Kempenaers B (1998) Extra-pair paternity in birds: explaining variation between species and populations. Trends Ecol Evol 13:52–58

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pitcher TE, Rodd FH, Rowe L (2007) Sexual colouration and sperm traits in guppies. J Fish Biol 70:165–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puurtinen M, Ketola T, Kotiaho JS (2005) Genetic compatibility and sexual selection. Trends Ecol Evol 20:157–158

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Puurtinen M, Ketola T, Kotiaho JS (2009) The good-genes and compatible genes benefits of female choice. Am Nat 174:741–752

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Radwan J (2003) Male age, germline mutations and the benefits of polyandry. Ecol Lett 6:581–586

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reid JM (2007) Secondary sexual ornaments and non-additive genetic benefits of female mate choice. Proc R Soc B 274:1395–1402

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Slagsvold T, Lifjeld J (1997) Incomplete knowledge of male quality may explain variation in extra-pair paternity in birds. Behaviour 134:353–371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmoll T, Schurr FM, Winkel W, Epplen JT, Lubjun T (2009) Lifespan, lifetime reproductive performance and the paternity loss of within-pair and extra-pair offspring in the coal tit Periparus ater. Proc Roy Soc B 276:337–345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westneat DF, Stewart IRK (2003) Extra-pair paternity in birds: causes, correlates, and conflict. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 34:365–396

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whittingham LA, Dunn PO (2001) Male parental care and paternity in birds. Curr Ornithol 16:257–298

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Oren Hasson.

Additional information

Communicated by Guest Editor J. McNamara

This contribution is part of the Special Issue “Mathematical Models in Ecology and Evolution: Darwin 200” (see Marshall et al. 2010).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hasson, O., Stone, L. Why do females have so few extra-pair offspring?. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 65, 513–523 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-010-1104-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-010-1104-z

Keywords

Navigation