Factors predicting male fertilization success in an external fertilizer
In postcopulatory sexual selection both sperm competition and cryptic female choice are considered to be important selective agents, but their relative importance for male fertilization success has received little attention. We tested whether sperm quality, male spawning coloration, male heterozygosity, and genetic overlap with the female explained a male’s fertilization success in controlled in vitro fertilization competition trials between equal numbers of sperm from pairs of male Arctic charr (Salvelinus alpinus), an external fertilizer. Offspring were genotyped to determine each males’ share of paternity. The velocity of a male’s sperm relative to the velocity of the competing male’s sperm was the best predictor of male fertilization success. Yet, sperm velocity was not related to spawning coloration or male heterozygosity. In fact, the most brightly colored male in a pair had the lowest fertilization probability. This could result from cryptic female choice for pale males, but might rather be a result of paler males producing more competitive sperm than more colored males. Furthermore, the more microsatellite alleles a male shared with the female relative to the competing male, the higher fertilization success he had. We argue that this latter may be an effect of assortative cryptic female choice, which might prevent hybridization with sympatric Arctic charr morphs or one form of kin selection.
KeywordsSperm competition Sperm velocity Reproductive success
Eirik Mack Eilertsen, Davnah Urbach, and Andreas Palmèn are acknowledged for enduring endless sessions of egg counting. E. M. Eilertsen is also the brain behind our ingenious, yet expensive, hatchery. Jon-Ivar Westgaard provided information about the microsatellite primers and PCR protocols. Jakob Lohm and Anne Grethe Hestnes never got tired of sharing their insights in various molecular biology techniques. Audun Stien introduced S. L. to quasibinomial tests and how to produce them, and additional plots, in the R software. Bård Jørgen Bårdsen was also very helpful teaching S. L. how to use R. Torkild Tveraa, Frode Skarstein, Jan T. Lifjeld and Anders P. Møller gave immensely improving comments to the manuscript.
- Birkhead TR, Møller AP (1998) Sperm competition and sexual selection. Academic, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
- Crawley MJ (2002) Statistical computing: an introduction to data analysis using S-Plus. Wiley, West SuccexGoogle Scholar
- Eberhard WG (1996) Female control: sexual selection by cryptic female choice. Princeton University Press, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
- Fabricius E (1953) Aquarium observations on the spawning behaviour of the char, Salmo alpinus. Rep Inst Freshw Res Drottningholm 34:14–48Google Scholar
- Kupriyanova E, Havenhand JN (2002) Variation in sperm swimming behaviour and its effect on fertilization success in the serpulid polychaete Galeolaria caespitosa. Invertebr Reprod Dev 41:21–26Google Scholar
- McCullagh P, Nelder JA (1989) General linear models. Chapman & Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
- R Core Development team (2004) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. In. Vienna, AustriaGoogle Scholar
- Simmons LW (2001) Sperm competition and its evolutionary consequences in the insects. Princeton University Press, New Jersey, USAGoogle Scholar