Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 33, Issue 6, pp 383–391 | Cite as

Operational sex ratios and sperm limitation in populations of Drosophila pachea

  • Scott Pitnick
Article

Abstract

Males of the cactophilic fruitfly, Drosophila pachea, produce relatively few but very large sperm, and partition their limited gamete numbers among successive mates. The present study found that males take 10 days longer than females, post-eclosion, to become sexually mature. The pattern of testes development suggests that the need to produce testes long enough to manufacture the giant sperm is the cause of the delayed male maturity. These findings generate the prediction that the operational sex ratio (OSR) of populations will be female-biased. The size, sex ratio, and OSR of natural populations were examined. In general, local populations tended to be small and sex ratios tended to be slightly male-biased. However, as predicted, the OSR of populations, at least in one season, tended to be female-biased, with an average of 2.3 receptive females for each sexually active male. Results of laboratory experiments to determine the relationship between female remating frequency and fitness, and between population OSR and productivity, suggest that natural populations with female-biased OSRs are sperm-limited. The origin and maintenance of sperm gigantism and the unusual sperm-partitioning behavior of males are discussed with respect to population structure.

Key words

Operational sex ratio Maxim system Sperm Age of maturity Drosophila 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Afzelius BA, Baccetti B, Dallai R (1976) The giant spermatozoon of Notonecta. J Submicrosc Cytol 8:149–161Google Scholar
  2. Briskie JV, Montgomerie R (1992) Sperm size and sperm competition in birds. Proc R Soc London B 247:89–95Google Scholar
  3. Briskie JV, Montgomerie R (1993) Patterns of sperm storage in relation to sperm competition in passerine birds. Condor 95:442–454Google Scholar
  4. Clutton-Brock TH (1991) The evolution of parental care. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  5. Cody ML (1966) A general theory of clutch size. Evolution 20:174–184Google Scholar
  6. Cohen J (1973) Crossovers, sperm redundancy, and their close association. Heredity 31:408–413Google Scholar
  7. Cummins JM, Woodall PF (1985) On mammalian sperm dimensions. J Reprod Fert 75:153–175Google Scholar
  8. Dewsbury DA (1982) Ejaculate cost and male choice. Am Nat 119:601–610Google Scholar
  9. Emlen ST, Oring LW (1977) Ecology, sexual selection and the evolution of mating systems. Science 197:215–223PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Fogleman JC, Duperret SM, Kircher HW (1986) The role of phytosterols in host plant utilization by cactophilic Drospholia. Lipids 21:92–96Google Scholar
  11. Gadgil M, Solbrig OT (1972) The concept of r- and K-selection: evidence from wild flowers and some theoretical considerations. Am Nat 106:14–31Google Scholar
  12. Gomendio M, Roldan ERS (1991) Sperm competition influences sperm size in mammals. Proc R Soc London B 243:181–185Google Scholar
  13. Hanski I, Gilpin M (1991) Metapopulation dynamics: brief history acid conceptual domain. Biol J Linn Soc 42:3–16Google Scholar
  14. Heed WB, Kircher HW (1965) Unique sterol in the ecology and nutrition of Drosophila pachea. Science 149:758–761Google Scholar
  15. Iwasa Y, Suzuki Y, Matsuda H (1984) Theory of oviposition strategy of parasitoids. 1. Effect of mortality and limited egg number. Theor Pop Biol 26:205–227Google Scholar
  16. Jamieson BGM (1987) The ultrastructure and phylogeny of insect spermatozoa. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  17. Jamieson BGM (1991) Fish evolution and systematics: evidence from spermatozoa. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  18. Jefferson MC (1977) Breeding biology of Drosophila pachea and its relatives. Ph D Dissertation, University of ArizonaGoogle Scholar
  19. Johnston SJ (1974) Dispersal in natural populations of the cactiphilic Drosophila pachea and D. mojavensis. Genetics (Suppl) 77:32–33Google Scholar
  20. Johnston SJ, Heed WB (1976) Dispersal of desert-adapted Drosophila: the saguaro-breeding D. nigrospiracula. Am Nat 110:629–651Google Scholar
  21. Joly D, Bressac C, Devaux J, Lachaise D (1991) Sperm length diversity in Drosophilidae. Drosophila Information Service 70:104–108Google Scholar
  22. Karlsson B, Wiklund C (1984) Egg weight variation and lack of correlation between egg weight and offspring fitness in the wall brown butterfly Lasiommata megera. Oikos 43:376–385Google Scholar
  23. Karr TL (1991) Intracellular sperm/egg interactions in Drosophila: A three-dimensional structural analysis of a paternal product in the developing egg. Mech Devel 34:101–112Google Scholar
  24. Knowlton N, Greenwell SR (1984) Male sperm competition avoidance mechanisms: the influence of female interests. In: Smith RH (ed) Sperm competition and the evolution of animal mating systems. Academic, New York, pp 61–84Google Scholar
  25. Low BS (1978) Environmental uncertainty and the parental strategies of marsupials and placentals. Am Nat 112:197–213Google Scholar
  26. Luckinbill LS, Arking R, Clare MG, Cirocco WC, Buck SA (1984) Selection for delayed senescence in Drosophila melanogaster. Evolution 38:996–1003Google Scholar
  27. Markow TA (1985) A comparative investigation of the mating system of Drosophila hydei. Anim Behav 33:775–781Google Scholar
  28. Markow TA (1988) Drosophila males provide a material contribution to offspring sired by other males. Funct Ecol 2:77–79Google Scholar
  29. Parker GA (1970) Sperm competition and its evolutionary consequences in the insects. Biol Rev 45:525–567Google Scholar
  30. Parker GA (1982) Why so many tiny sperm? The maintenance of two sexes with internal fertilization. J Theor Biol 96:281–294Google Scholar
  31. Parker GA (1984) Sperm competition and the evolution of animal mating strategies. In: Smith RH (ed) Sperm competition and the evolution of animal mating systems. Academic, New York, pp 1–60Google Scholar
  32. Parker GA, Begon M (1986) Optimal egg size and clutch size: effects of environment and maternal phenotype. Am Nat 128:573–592Google Scholar
  33. Parker GA, Courtney SP (1984) Models of clutch size in insect oviposition. Theor Pop Biol 26:27–48Google Scholar
  34. Pierce JD, Ferguson B, Salo AL, Sawrey DK, Shapiro LE, Taylor SA, Dewsbury DA (1990) Patterns of sperm allocation across successive ejaculates in four species of voles (Microtus). J Reprod Fert 88:141–149Google Scholar
  35. Perotti ME (1973) The mitochondrial derivative of the spermatozoon of Drosophila before and after fertilization. J Ultrastruct Res 44:181–198Google Scholar
  36. Pitnick S (1992) Sexual selection and sperm production in Drosophila. Ph D Dissertation, Arizona State UniversityGoogle Scholar
  37. Pitnick S, Markow TA (1994) Male gametic strategies: Sperm size, testes size, and the allocation of ejaculate among successive mates by the sperm-limited fly Drosophila pachea and its relatives. Am Nat, in pressGoogle Scholar
  38. Pitnick S, Markow TA, Riedy MF (1991) Transfer of ejaculate and incorporation of male-derived substances by females in the nannoptera species group (Diptera: Drosophilidea). Evolution 45:774–780Google Scholar
  39. Rockwood-Sluss ES, Johnston JS, Heed WB (1973) Allozyme genotype-environment relationships. I. variation in natural populations of Drosophila pachea. Genetics 73:135–146Google Scholar
  40. Rose MR, Charlesworth B (1981) Genetics of life history in Drosophila melanogaster. II. Exploratory selection experiments. Genetics 97:187–196Google Scholar
  41. Seger J, Brockmann HJ (1987) What is bet-hedging? Oxford Surv Evol Biol 4:182–211Google Scholar
  42. Sinervo B, Licht P (1991) Proximate constraints on the evolution of egg size, number, and total clutch mass in lizards. Science 252:1300–1302Google Scholar
  43. Sivinski J (1980) Sexual selection and insect sperm. Fla Entomol 63:99–111Google Scholar
  44. Sivinski J (1984) Sperm in competition. In: Smith RH (ed) Sperm competition and the evolution of animal mating systems. Academic, New York, pp 85–115Google Scholar
  45. Skinner SW (1985) Clutch size as an optimal foraging problem for insects. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 17:231–238Google Scholar
  46. Spieth HT (1952) Mating behavior within the genus Drosophila (Diptera). Bull Am Mus Natur Hist 99:399–474Google Scholar
  47. Svard L, Wiklund C (1986) Different ejaculate delivery strategies in first versus subsequent matings in the swallowtail butterfly Papilio machaon L. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 18:325–330Google Scholar
  48. Thornhill R, Alcock J (1983) The evolution of insect mating systems. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  49. Waage JK, Godfray HCJ (1985) Reproductive strategies and population ecology of insect parasitoids. In: Sibly RM, Smith RH (eds) Behavioral ecology. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 449–470Google Scholar
  50. Wilbur HM (1977) Propagule size, number, and dispersion pattern in Ambystoma and Asclepias. Am Nat 111:43–68Google Scholar
  51. Williams GC (1957) Pleiotropy, natural selection and the evolution of senescence. Evolution 11:398–411Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Scott Pitnick
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of ZoologyArizona State UniversityTempeUSA
  2. 2.Center for Insect ScienceTucsonUSA

Personalised recommendations