Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 67, Issue 3, pp 395–398 | Cite as

Male control of sperm transfer dynamics in a spermatophore-donating bushcricket

Original Paper

Abstract

In many animal species, male and female interests often differ when it comes to decisions over mating and fertilization. However, it is intrinsically difficult to determine the degree to which males and females exert control over the various processes that determine the outcome of reproductive interactions, and thus to predict how such conflicts will be resolved. For example, in species where sperm are transferred to females via a spermatophore or other external sperm packaging device, it is unclear which sex determines subsequent sperm transfer dynamics to the female reproductive tract. To address this question, we used a reciprocal cross experimental design in a bushcricket species (Poecilimon veluchianus) comprising two subspecies differing in the dynamics of sperm transfer. The reciprocal crosses show that in these bushcrickets the timing of sperm transfer in inter-subspecies crosses closely resemble those typical of the subspecies of the male partner, indicating that it is the properties of the spermatophore rather than its handling by the female that determine sperm transfer dynamics. There was neither a significant female influence nor any indication of an interaction between males and females with regard to the number of sperm transferred after a set interval. Our study suggests that males rather than females appear to control the timing of the insemination process in this species.

Keywords

Bushcrickets Insemination Sexual conflict Spermatophore Sperm transfer 

References

  1. Achmann R, Heller KG, Epplen JT (1992) Last–male sperm precedence in the bushcricket Poecilimon veluchianus (Orthoptera, Tettigonioidea) demonstrated by DNA fingerprinting. Mol Ecol 1:47–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arnqvist G, Rowe L (2002) Correlated evolution of male and female morphologies in water striders. Evolution 56:936–947PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Arnqvist G, Rowe L (2005) Sexual conflict. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  4. Bloch Qazi M, Hogdal L (2010) Hold on: females modulate sperm depletion from storage sites in the fly Drosophila melanogaster. J Insect Physiol 56:328–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Eberhard WG (1996) Female control: sexual selection by cryptic female choice. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  6. Heller K-G, Reinhold K (1993) A new subspecies of Poecilimon veluchianus Ramme, 1933 (Tettigonioidea, Phaneropteridae) from Greece. Articulata 8:23–29Google Scholar
  7. Heller KG, Reinhold K (1994) Mating effort function of the spermatophore in the bushcricket Poecilimon veluchianus (Orthoptera, Phaneropteridae): support from a comparison of the mating behaviour of two subspecies. Biol J Linn Soc 53:153–163Google Scholar
  8. Lehmann GUC, Lehmann AW (2009) Condition-dependent spermatophore size is correlated with male’s age in a bushcricket (Orthoptera: Phaneropteridae). Biol J Linn Soc 96:354–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Parker GA (1979) Sexual selection and sexual conflict. In: Blum MS, Blum NB (eds) Sexual selection and reproductive competition in insects. Academic, New York, pp 123–123166Google Scholar
  10. Parker GA (2006) Sexual conflict over mating and fertilization: an overview. Philos Trans R Soc B: Biol Sci 361:235–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Perez-Staples D, Weldon C, Radhakrishnan P, Prenter J (2010) Control of copula duration and sperm storage by female Queensland fruit flies. J Insect Physiol 56:1755–1762PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Pizzari T, Birkhead TR (2000) Female feral fowl eject sperm of subdominant males. Nature 405:787–789PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Proctor HC (1998) Indirect sperm transfer in arthropods: behavioral and evolutionary trends. Annu Rev Entomol 43:153–174PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Reinhold K (1994) Inheritance of body and testis size in the bushcricket Poecilimon veluchianus Ramme (Orthoptera; Tettigoniidae) examined by means of subspecies hybrids. Biol J Linn Soc 52:305–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Reinhold K (1999) Paternal investment in Poecilimon veluchianus bushcrickets: beneficial effects of nuptial feeding on offspring viability. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 45:293–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Reinhold K, Heller K-G (1993) The ultimate function of nuptial feeding in the bushcricket Poecilimon veluchianus (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae: Phaneropterinae). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 32:55–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Sakaluk S (1984) Male crickets feed females to ensure complete sperm transfer. Science 223:609–610PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Sakaluk S, Eggert A (1996) Female control of sperm transfer and intraspecific variation in sperm precedence: antecedents to the evolution of a courtship food gift. Evolution 50:694–703CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Simmons LW (1986) Female choice in the field cricket Gryllus bimaculatus. Anim Behav 34:1463–1470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Snook RR, Hosken DJ (2004) Sperm death and dumping in Drosophila. Nature 428:939–941PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Tregenza T, Wedell N (2002) Polyandrous females avoid costs of inbreeding. Nature 415:71–73PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Vahed K (1998) The function of nuptial feeding in insects: review of empirical studies. Biol Rev 73:43–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Watanabe M, Sasaki N (2010) Pattern of sperm storage and migration in the reproductive tract of the swallowtail butterfly Papilio xuthus: cryptic female choice after second mating. Physiol Entomol 35:328–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Evolutionary BiologyBielefeld UniversityBielefeldGermany

Personalised recommendations