Advertisement

The effect of predation risk on post-copulatory sexual selection in the Japanese pygmy squid

Original Article

Abstract

Conspicuous male sexual traits (e.g. weapons for male–male competition and displays for courting females) may attract predators. Under conditions of high predation risk, females typically become less choosy with respect to mates to reduce the time spent on mate selection. However, post-copulatory sexual traits, such as sperm ejaculation for sperm competition and sperm removal for cryptic female choice (CFC), may increase with predation risk because they are more inconspicuous to predators. To examine this hypothesis, we observed the reproductive behaviour in the Japanese pygmy squid, Idiosepius paradoxus, in which the male attaches ejaculated spermatangia to the female’s body and the female removes the spermatangia after copulation. Squid from two populations (Ohmura and Oki), with low and high predation levels, respectively, were copulated in tanks under controlled presence/absence of predator conditions. Among the Ohmura individuals, spermatangia removal was suppressed in the presence of a predator. Females may not be able to remove spermatangia effectively when facing a predator because they feel threatened by the predator; as a result, more spermatangia were retained during trials in which they were exposed to predators. In contrast, squid from the Oki (high predation) population, which is exposed to a higher predation risk, were not strongly affected by the predator presence. While the males ejaculated more spermatangia, the females removed more of them. The effect of sexual conflict may be greater than that of the predation risk in the pygmy squid. This suggests adaptive differences in post-copulatory sexual selection traits linked to predation.

Significance statement

In general, the strength of pre-copulatory sexual selection decreases with increasing predation risk because the sexual traits attract predators. However, post-copulatory sexual traits which are often inconspicuous may not be influenced by predation risk. Post-copulatory behaviour of Japanese pygmy squid collected from two populations experiencing different predation levels were investigated under experimental predator presence/absence conditions. Among low predations, individual sperm rejection by females (a post-copulatory trait) was suppressed in the presence of a predator. In contrast, individuals from the high predation population reported no change in sperm rejection. As with pre-copulatory sexual selection, post-copulatory female choice was suppressed by predator presence among individuals from a low predation. However, post-copulatory female choice was not affected by predator presence among individuals from the high-predation population. This may indicate predation-driven adaptive differences and plastic responses in post-copulatory traits.

Keywords

Cryptic female choice Sperm competition Predation risk Sexual conflict Cephalopod Idiosepius paradoxus 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Dr. S. Awata and Dr. N. Hirohashi for supporting specimen collection and Dr. N. J. McKeown for their critical comments on the manuscript. We thank an associate editor, Dr. D. J. Hosken and three referees for their helpful comments. This research was supported financially by Research Fellowships of the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science for Young Scientists (to NS). The author (NS) also thanks the faculty of Life and Environmental Science in Shimane University for help in financial support for publishing this report.

Compliance with ethical standards

Ethical approval

This study was approved by the Animal Care and Use Committee of Faculty of Fisheries, Nagasaki University (permission no. NF-0014), in accordance with the Guidelines for Animal Experimentation of Faculty of Fisheries (fish, amphibians and invertebrates), and Regulations of the Animal Care and Use Committee, Nagasaki University.

Supplementary material

265_2018_2540_MOESM1_ESM.docx (46 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 46 kb)
265_2018_2540_MOESM2_ESM.xlsx (31 kb)
ESM 2 (XLSX 31 kb)

References

  1. Andersson MB (1994) Sexual selection. Princeton University press. In: PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  2. Arnqvist G, Rowe L (2005) Sexual conflict. Princeton University press. In: PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  3. Bierbach D, Schulte M, Herrmann N, Tobler M, Stadler S, Jung CT, Kunkel B, Riesch R, Klaus S, Ziege M, Indy JR, Rodriguez LA, Plath M (2011) Predator-induced changes of female mating preferences: innate and experiential effects. BMC Evol Biol 11:190CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. Birkhead TR, Møller AP (1998) Sperm competition and sexual selection. Academic Press, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
  5. Bolker BM, Brooks ME, Clark CJ, Geange SW, Poulsen JR, Stevens MHH, White JSS (2009) Generalized linear mixed models: a practical guide for ecology and evolution. Trends Ecol Evol 24:127–135CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Brodeur RD, Pearcy WG (1984) Food habits and dietary overlap of some shelf rockfishes (genus Sebastes) from the northeastern Pacific Ocean. Fish Bull 82:269–293Google Scholar
  7. Crawley MJ (2005) Statistics: An Introduction Using R. John Wiley & Sons, West SussexCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Eberhard WG (1996) Female control: sexual selection by cryptic female choice. Princeton University press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  9. Elgee KE, Evans JP, Ramnarine IW, Rush SA, Pitcher TE (2010) Geographic variation in sperm traits reflects predation risk and natural rates of multiple paternity in the guppy. J Evol Biol 23:1331–1338CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Forsgren E (1992) Predation risk affects mate choice in a gobiid fish. Am Nat 140:1041–1049CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Franklin AM, Squires ZE, Stuart-Fox D (2014) Does predation risk affect mating behavior? An experimental test in dumpling squid (Euprymna tasmanica). PLoS One 9:e115027CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Garcia-Gonzalez F, Yasui Y, Evans JP (2015) Mating portfolios: bet-hedging, sexual selection and female multiple mating. Proc R Soc Biol Sci B 282:20141525CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Godin JGJ, Briggs SE (1996) Female mate choice under predation risk in the guppy. Anim Behav 51:117–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hanlon RT, Messenger JB (1998) Cephalopod behaviour. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  15. Hedrick AV, Dill LM (1993) Mate choice by female crickets is influenced by predation risk. Anim Behav 46:193–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Horinouchi M, Sano M (2000) Food habits of fishes in a Zostera marina bed at Aburatsubo, Central Japan. Ichthyol Res 47:163–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jennions MD, Petrie M (2000) Why do females mate multiply? A review of the genetic benefits. Biol Rev 75:21–64CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Johnson JB, Basolo AL (2003) Predator exposure alters female mate choice in the green swordtail. Behav Ecol 14:619–625CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Karino K, Kuwamura T, Nakashima Y, Sakai Y (2000) Predation risk and the opportunity for female mate choice in a coral reef fish. J Ethol 18:109–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kasugai T (2000) Reproductive behavior of the pygmy cuttlefish Idiosepius paradoxus in an aquarium. Venus 59:37–44Google Scholar
  21. Kelly CD, Godin JGJ (2001) Predation risk reduces male-male sexual competition in the Trinidadian guppy (Poecilia reticulata). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 51:95–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kim TW, Christy JH, Dennenmoser S, Choe JC (2009) The strength of a female mate preference increases with predation risk. Proc R Soc Biol Sci B. 276:775–780CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kwak SN, Baeck GW, Klumpp DW (2005) Comparative feeding ecology of two sympatric greenling species, Hexagrammos otakii and Hexagrammos agrammus in eelgrass Zostera marina beds. Environ Biol Fish 74:129–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lima SL, Dill LM (1990) Behavioral decisions made under the risk of predation: a review and prospectus. Can J Zool 68:619–640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lodé T, Holveck MJ, Lesbarrères D, Pagano A (2004) Sex–biased predation by polecats influences the mating system of frogs. Proc R Soc Biol Sci B. 271:S399–S401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lu CC, Dunning MC (1998) Subclass Coleoidea. In: Beesley PL, GJB R, Wells A (eds) Mollusca: the Southern Synthesis. Fauna of Australia, 5. Part A. CSIRO publishing, Melbourne, pp 499–563Google Scholar
  27. Magnhagen C (1991) Predation risk as a cost of reproduction. Trends Ecol Evol 6:183–186CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Maier G, Berger I, Burghard W, Nassal B (2000) Is mating of copepods associated with increased risk of predation? J Plankton Res 22:1977–1987CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Michalska K (2016) The effect of predation risk on spermatophore deposition rate of the eriophyoid mite, Aculops allotrichus. Exp Appl Acarol 68:145–154CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Neff BD, Pitcher TE, Ramnarine IW (2008) Inter-population variation in multiple paternity and reproductive skew in the guppy. Mol Ecol 17:2975–2984CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Nishiumi N, Mori A (2015) Distance-dependent switching of anti-predator behavior of frogs from immobility to fleeing. J Ethol 33:117–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pitcher TE, Doucet SM, Beausoleil JM, Hanley D (2009) Secondary sexual characters and sperm traits in coho salmon Oncorhynchus kisutch. J Fish Biol 74:1450–1461CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. R Development Core Team (2017) R: A language and environment for statistical computing, reference index version 3.4.2. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria www.R-project.org Google Scholar
  34. Sano M (1998) Is recruitment of the temperate sand goby, Sagamia geneionema, affected by habitat patch characteristics? Ichthyol Res 45:13–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sasaki M (1923) On an adhering habit of a pygmy cuttlefish, Idiosepius pygmaeus steenstrup. Annot Zool Jpn 10:209–213Google Scholar
  36. Sato N (2017) Seasonal changes in reproductive traits and paternity in the Japanese pygmy squid Idiosepius paradoxus. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 582:121–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sato N, Kasugai T, Ikeda Y, Munehara H (2010) Structure of the seminal receptacle and sperm storage in the Japanese pygmy squid. J Zool 282:151–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sato N, Yoshida MA, Fujiwara E, Kasugai T (2013a) High-speed camera observations of copulatory behaviour in Idiosepius paradoxus: function of the dimorphic hectocotyli. J Mollus Stud 79:183–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sato N, Kasugai T, Munehara H (2013b) Sperm transfer or spermatangia removal: postcopulatory behaviour of picking up spermatangium by female Japanese pygmy squid. Mar Biol 160:553–561CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sato N, Kasugai T, Munehara H (2014a) Spermatangium formation and sperm discharge in the Japanese pygmy squid Idiosepius paradoxus. Zoology 117:192–199CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Sato N, Kasugai T, Munehara H (2014b) Female pygmy squid cryptically favour small males and fast copulation as observed by removal of spermatangia. Evol Biol 41:221–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sato N, Yoshida MA, Kasugai T (2017) Impact of cryptic female choice on insemination success: larger sized and longer copulating male squid ejaculate more, but females influence insemination success by removing spermatangia. Evolution 71:111–120CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Simmons LW, Emlen DJ (2006) Evolutionary trade-off between weapons and testes. Proc Nat Acad Sci 103:16346–16351CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Stockley P, Gage MJG, Parker GA, Møller AP (1997) Sperm competition in fishes: the evolution of testis size and ejaculate characteristics. Am Nat 149:933–954CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Taylor AR, Persons MH, Rypstra AL (2005) The effect of perceived predation risk on male courtship and copulatory behavior in the wolf spider Pardosa milvina (Araneae, Lycosidae). J Arachnol 33:76–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Thornhill R (1983) Cryptic female choice and its implications in the scorpionfly Harpobittacus nigriceps. Am Nat 122:765–788CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Willis PM, Rosenthal GG, Ryan MJ (2012) An indirect cue of predation risk counteracts female preference for conspecifics in a naturally hybridizing fish Xiphophorus birchmanni. PLoS One 7:e34802CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  48. Yamane T, Okada K, Nakayama S, Miyatake T (2010) Dispersal and ejaculatory strategies associated with exaggeration of weapon in an armed beetle. Proc R Soc Biol Sci B 277:1705–1710Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate School of Fisheries and Environmental SciencesNagasaki UniversityNagasakiJapan
  2. 2.Oki Marine Biological StationShimane UniversityOkiJapan
  3. 3.Faculty of FisheriesNagasaki UniversityNagasakiJapan

Personalised recommendations