Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 63, Issue 9, pp 1363–1368 | Cite as

Adult sex ratio affects divorce rate in the monogamous endoparasite Schistosoma mansoni

  • Sophie Beltran
  • Frank Cézilly
  • Jérôme BoissierEmail author
Original Paper


“Divorce” (mate switching) rate is known to vary largely both between and within socially monogamous species. Although the adult sex ratio can have an important influence on mating patterns, very few studies have investigated the influence of sex ratio on divorce rate in monogamous species, and even less so from an experimental point of view. In addition, most studies on the causes and consequences of divorce have been performed on vertebrate species, whereas data for invertebrate monogamous species remain scarce. Schistosoma mansoni is a monogamous endoparasite with a complex life cycle characterized by asexual reproduction in the intermediate host and sexual reproduction in the definitive host. In the wild, populations of S. mansoni inside their definitive hosts are characterized by a male-biased sex ratio. We studied the influence of experimentally varying the adult sex ratio on divorce rate in S mansoni, using controlled infections of hosts with clonal populations. The more male-biased the sex ratio was, the more the divorce rate increased, whereas no such effect was observed under a female-biased sex ratio. In this study and for the first time, we showed, by handling the sex ratio, that the divorce rate increases in adult male-biased sex ratio conditions in a monogamous species.


Adult sex ratio Better option hypothesis Forced divorce hypothesis Monogamy Schistosomes 



We wish to thank Bernard Dejean, Anne Rognon, and Pierre Tisseyre for technical assistance. This work was supported by the French Ministère de l'Enseignement Supérieur et de la Recherche, the CNRS, and the Agence Nationale de la Recherche (Program Monogamix ANR-08-BLAN-0214-02).


  1. Andersson M (1994) Sexual selection. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  2. Beltran S, Boissier J (2008) Schistosomes monogamy: who, how, and why? Trends Parasitol 24:386–391PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beltran S, Galinier R, Allienne JF, Boissier J (2008) Cheap, rapid and efficient DNA extraction method to perform multilocus microsatellite genotyping on all Schistosoma mansoni stages. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz 103:501–503PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Black JM (ed) (1996) Partnerships in birds. The study of monogamy. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  5. Boissier J, Moné H (2000) Experimental observations on the sex ratio of adult Schistosoma mansoni, with comments on the natural male bias. Parasitology 121:379–383PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boissier J, Durand P, Moné H (2001) PCR effectiveness for sexing Schistosoma mansoni cercariae: application for sexing clonal cercarial population. Mol Biochem Parasitol 112:139–141PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bull MC (2000) Monogamy in lizards. Behav Process 51:7–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cézilly F (2006) Le Paradoxe de l'Hippocampe. Une Histoire Naturelle de la Monogamie. Buchet-Chastel, ParisGoogle Scholar
  9. Cézilly F, Préault M, Dubois F, Faivre B (2000) Pair-bonding in birds and the active role of females: a critical review of the empirical evidence. Behav Process 51:83–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Choudhury S (1995) Divorce in birds: a review of the hypotheses. Anim Behav 50:413–429CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Curtis J, Sorensen RE, Kristen Page L, Minchella DJ (2001) Microsatellite loci in the human blood fluke Schistosoma mansoni and their utility for other schistosome species. Mol Ecol Notes 1:143–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Danchin E, Cézilly F (2008) Sexual selection: another evolutionary process. In: Danchin É, Giraldeau L-A, Cézilly F (eds) Behavioural ecology. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 363–426Google Scholar
  13. Debuse VJ, Addison JT, Reynolds JD (1999) The effects of sex-ratio on sexual competition in the European lobster. Anim Behav 58:973–981PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dubois F, Cézilly F (2002) Breeding success and mate retention in birds: a meta-analysis. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 52:357–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Durand P, Sire C, Théron A (2000) Isolation of microsatellite markers in the digenetic trematode Schistosoma mansoni from Guadeloupe island. Mol Ecol 9:997–998PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ens BJ, Safriel UN, Harris MP (1993) Divorce in the long-lived and monogamous oystercatcher, Haematopus ostralegus: incompatibility or choosing the better option? Anim Behav 45:1199–1217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fukurai H, Alston JP (1992) Ecological determinants of divorce—a structural approach to the explanation of Japanese divorce. Soc Biol 39:257–277PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Hardy IC (2002) Sex ratios. Concepts and research methods. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  19. Iribarne O, Fernandez M, Armstrong D (1996) Mate choice in the amphipod Eogammarus oclairi Bousfield: the role of current velocity, random assortment, habitat heterogeneity and male’s behavior. Mar Fresh Behav Physiol 27:223–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Iyengar VK, Starks BD (2008) Sexual selection in harems: male competition plays a larger role than female choice in an amphipod. Behav Ecol 19:642–649CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jormalainen V, Merilaita S (1995) Female resistance and duration of mate-guarding in three aquatic peracarids (Crustacea). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 36:43–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jormalainen V, Merilaita S, Tuomi J (1994) Male choice and male–male competition in Idotea baltica (Crustacea, Isopoda). Ethology 96:46–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kvarnemo C, Ahnesjo I (1996) The dynamics of operational sex ratios and competition for mates. Trends Ecol Evol 11:404–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kvarnemo C, Moore GI, Jones AG, Nelson WS, Avise JC (2000) Monogamous pair bonds and mate switching in the Western Australian seahorse Hippocampus subelongatus. J Evol Biol 13:882–888CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Liberatos JD (1987) Schistosoma mansoni: male-biased sex ratios in snails and mice. Exp Parasitol 64:165–177PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. LoVerde PT, Niles EG, Osman AA, Wu W (2004) Schistosoma mansoni male–female interactions. Can J Zool 82:357–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Maness TJ, Anderson DJ (2007) Serial monogamy and sex ratio bias in Nazca boobies. Proc R Soc Ser B 274:2047–2054CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Marchesan M (2002) Operational sex ratio and breeding strategies in the feral pigeon Columbia livia. Ardea 90:249–257Google Scholar
  29. Moné H, Boissier J (2004) Sexual biology of schistosomes. Adv Parasitol 57:89–189PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Morand S, Pointier JP, Borel G, Théron A (1993) Pairing probability of schistosomes related to their distribution among the host population. Ecology 74:2444–2449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Palombit R (1994) Pair bonds in monogamous apes: a comparison of the siamang Hylobates syndactylus and the white-handed gibbon Hylobates lar. Behaviour 133:321–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pica-Mattoccia L, Moroni R, Tchuem Tchuente LA, Southgate VR, Cioli D (2000) Changes of mate occur in Schistosoma mansoni. Parasitology 120:495–500PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Popiel I, Basch PF (1995) Reproductive development of female Schistosoma mansoni (Digena: Schistosomatidae) following bisexual pairing of worms and worm segments. J Exp Zool 232:141–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Prugnolle F, De Meeûs T, Durand P, Sire C, Théron A (2002) Sex-specific genetic structure in Schistosoma mansoni: evolutionary and epidemiological implications. Mol Ecol 11:1231–1238PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rodrigues NB, Silvia MR, Pucci MM, Minchella DJ, Sorensen R, Loverde PT, Romanha AJ, Oliveira G (2007) Microsatellite-enriched genomic libraries as a source of polymorphic loci for Schistosoma mansoni. Mol Ecol Notes 7:263–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. South SJ, Trent K, Shen Y (2001) Changing partners: toward a macrostructural-opportunity theory of marital dissolution. J Marriage Fam 63:743–754CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Svendsen GE (1989) Pair formation, duration of pair-bonds, and mate replacement in a population of beavers (Castor canadiensis). Can J Zool 67:336–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Székely T, Cuthill I, Kis J (1999) Brood desertion in Kentish plover: sex differences in remating opportunities. Behav Ecol 10:185–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Taborsky B, Taborsky M (1999) The mating system and stability of pairs in kiwi Apteryx spp. J Avian Biol 30:143–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Tchuem Tchuente LA, Imbert-Establet D, Delay B, Jourdane J (1993) Choice of mate, a reproductive isolating mechanism between Schistosoma intercalatum and S. mansoni in mixed infections. Int J Parasitol 23:179–185PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Tchuem Tchuente LA, Southgate VR, Imbert-Establet D, Jourdane J (1995) Change of mate and mating competition between males of Schistosoma intercalatum and S. mansoni. Parasitology 110:45–52PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Tchuem Tchuente LA, Southgate VR, Combes C, Jourdane J (1996) Mating behaviour in schistosomes: are paired worms always faithful? Parasitol Today 12:231–236PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. van Breukelen NA, Draud M (2005) The roles of male size and female eavesdropping in divorce in the monogamous convict cichlid (Archocentrus nigrofasciatus, Cichlidae). Behaviour 142:1023–1035CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Whiteman EA, Côté IM (2004) Monogamy in marine fishes. Biol Rev 79:351–375PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sophie Beltran
    • 1
  • Frank Cézilly
    • 2
  • Jérôme Boissier
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Université de Perpignan, Laboratoire de Biologie et d’Ecologie Tropicale et Méditerranéenne, UMR 5244 CNRS–EPHE–UPVDPerpignan CedexFrance
  2. 2.Université de Bourgogne, Equipe Ecologie Evolutive, UMR CNRS 5561 BiogéosciencesDijonFrance

Personalised recommendations