Skip to main content
Log in

Do the size and age of mating plugs alter their efficacy in protecting paternity?

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

Abstract

An obvious means to secure paternity is the production of a mating plug that blocks the female genital opening after mating. Although the mechanical efficacy and persistence of plugs on/in the female genital openings are key traits that determine the degree of paternity protection, these factors have hardly been explored. We therefore investigated the influence of the size of the amorphous plug material (experimentally terminated mating duration as a proxy) and age of the mating plug (time interval between copulations with two successive males) on the efficacy of the plug by analysing the mating success of subsequent males in the dwarf spider Oedothorax retusus (Linyphiidae: Erigoninae). Overall, subsequent males attempted to mate in 82 % of trials but only 32.5 % of these resulted in copulation, demonstrating that the plugs are effective safeguards against remating. Remating probability was significantly higher after previous short copulations (~small plug size) compared to long copulations (~large plug size). In the small plug group, fresh plugs (short remating intervals) were significantly less effective compared to older plugs. In the large plug group, remating probability was similarly low over all remating intervals. The observed copulations, however, do not necessarily result in sperm transfer, since sperm masses were found on the plugged female genital area. Our study on O. retusus shows that mating plugs are a powerful mechanical safeguard whose efficacy varies with plug size and age. We discuss these findings in the light of theoretical considerations on the evolution of effective mating plugs.

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.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aisenberg A, Barrantes G (2011) Sexual behavior, cannibalism, and mating plugs as sticky traps in the orb weaver spider Leucauge argyra (Tetragnathidae). Naturwissenschaften 98:605–613

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Aisenberg A, Eberhard WG (2009) Female cooperation in plug formation in a spider: effects of male copulatory courtship. Behav Ecol 20:1236–1241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersson J, Borg-Karlson AK, Wiklund C (2003) Antiaphrodisiacs in pierid butterflies: a theme with variation! J Chem Ecol 29:1489–1499

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Austad SN (1984) Evolution of sperm priority patterns in spiders. In: Smith RL (ed) Sperm competition and the evolution of mating systems. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 223–249

    Google Scholar 

  • Avila FW, Sirot LK, LaFlamme BA, Rubinstein CD, Wolfner MF (2011) Insect seminal fluid proteins: identification and function. Annu Rev Entomol 56:21–40

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Birkhead TR, Møller AP (1998) Sperm competition and sexual selection. Academic Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Colonello NA, Hartfelder K (2005) She’s my girl—male accessory gland products and their function in the reproductive biology of social bees. Apidologie 36:231–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diesel R (1990) Sperm competition and reproductive success in the decapod Inachus phalangium (Majidae): a male ghost spider crab that seals off rivals’ sperm. J Zool 220:213–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eberhard WG (2004) Why study spider sex: special traits of spiders facilitate studies of sperm competition and cryptic female choice. J Arachnol 32:545–556

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eberhard WG (2009) Postcopulatory sexual selection: Darwin’s omission and its consequences. Proc Natl Acad Sci 106:10025–10032

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Elgar MA (1998) Sperm competition and sexual selection in spiders and other arachnids. In: Birkhead TR, Møller AP (eds) Sperm competition and sexual selection. Academic Press, London, pp 307–339

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Fromhage L (2011) Mating unplugged: a model for the evolution of mating plug (dis-)placement. Evolution 66–1:31–39

    Google Scholar 

  • Gack C, Peschke K (1994) Spermathecal morphology, sperm transfer and a novel mechanism of sperm displacement in the rove beetle, Aleochara curtula (Coleoptera, Staphylinidae). Zoomorphology 114:227–237

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herberstein ME, Wignall AE, Nessler SH, Harmer AMT, Schneider JM (2012) How effective and persistent are fragments of male genitalia as mating plugs? Behav Ecol 23:1140–1145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huber BA, Senglet A (1997) Copulation with contralateral insertion in entelegyne spiders (Araeneae: Entelegynae: Tetragnathidae). Neth J Zool 47:99–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson RR (1980) The mating strategy of Phidippus johnsoni (Araneae, Salticidae): II. Sperm competition and the function of copulation. J Arachnol 8:217–240

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuntner M, Gregorič M, Zhang S, Kralj-Fišer S, Li D (2012) Mating plugs in polyandrous giants: which sex produces them, when, how and why? PLoS ONE 7:e40939. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0040939

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kunz K, Garbe S, Uhl G (2012) The function of the secretory cephalic hump in males of the dwarf spider Oedothorax retusus (Linyphiidae: Erigoninae). Anim Behav 83:511–517

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masumoto T (1993) The effect of the copulatory plug in the funnel-web spider, Agelena limbata (Araneae: Agelenidae). J Arachnol 21:55–59

    Google Scholar 

  • Matsumoto K, Suzuki N (1992) Effectiveness of the mating plug in Atrophaneura alcinous (Lepidoptera, Papilionidae). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 30:157–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller JA, Hormiga G (2004) Clade stability and the addition of data: a case study from erigonine spiders (Araneae: Linyphiidae, Erigoninae). Cladistics 20:385–442

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mulisch M, Welsch U (2010) Romeis - Mikroskopische Technik. Spektrum Akademischer Verlag, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Donnell RP, Ford NB, Shine R, Mason RT (2004) Male red-sided garter snakes (Thamnophis sirtalis parietalis) determine female mating status from pheromone trails. Anim Behav 68:677–683

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orr AG, Rutowski RL (1991) The function of the sphragis in Cressida cressida (Fab) (Lepidoptera, Papilionidae): a visual deterrent to copulation attempts. J Nat Hist 25:703–710

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker GA (1998) Sperm competition and the evolution of ejaculates: towards a theory base. In: Birkhead TR, Møller AP (eds) Sperm competition and sexual selection. Academic Press, London, pp 3–54

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Polak M, Wolf LL, Starmer WT, Barker JSF (2001) Function of the mating plug in Drosophila hibisci Bock. Anim Behav 49:196–205

    Google Scholar 

  • Richter N (2006) Zur Funktion der Kopfsekrete männlicher Zwergspinnen. Diploma thesis, University of Bonn

  • Schlechter-Helas J, Schmitt T, Peschke K (2011) A contact anti-aphrodisiac pheromone supplied by the spermatophore in the rove beetle Aleochara curtula: mode of transfer and evolutionary significance. Naturwissenschaften 98:855–862

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schulz S, Estrada C, Yildizhan S, Boppré M, Gilbert LE (2008) An antiaphrodisiac in Heliconius melpomene butterflies. J Chem Ecol 34:82–93

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shine R, Olsson MM, Mason RT (2000) Chastity belts in gartersnakes: the functional significance of mating plugs. Biol J Linn Soc 70:377–390

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Uhl G, Busch M (2009) Securing paternity: mating plugs in the dwarf spider Oedothorax retusus (Araneae: Erigoninae). Biol J Linn Soc 96:574–583

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uhl G, Kunz K, Vöcking O, Lipke E (2014) A spider mating plug: origin and constraints of production. Biol J Linn Soc, in press

  • Uhl G, Nessler SH, Schneider JM (2010) Securing paternity in spiders? A review on occurrence and effects of mating plugs and male genital mutilation. Genetica 138:75–104

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wedell N (2005) Female receptivity in butterflies and moths. J Exp Biol 208:3433–3440

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Rabea Schlüter (Imaging Centre University of Greifswald) for expert introduction to the SEM microscope. We thank Lara Lopardo, Michael Schmitt, the editor Mark Elgar and three anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments, which helped us to improve the manuscript. The experiments comply with the current laws of Germany.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Katrin Kunz.

Additional information

Communicated by M. Elgar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kunz, K., Witthuhn, M. & Uhl, G. Do the size and age of mating plugs alter their efficacy in protecting paternity?. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 68, 1321–1328 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-014-1742-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-014-1742-7

Keywords

Navigation