Marine Biology

, Volume 162, Issue 11, pp 2251–2256 | Cite as

Eggs with larger accessory structures are more likely to be fertilized in both low and high sperm concentrations in Styela plicata (Ascidiaceae)

Original Paper

Abstract

The evolution of egg size has been intensively studied due to its influence on both fecundity and offspring performance. In marine broadcast spawners, egg size influences the probability of sperm–egg collision, and therefore, egg size can also influence fertilization success, depending on the local concentration of sperm. Many broadcast-spawning species have egg accessory structures that are thought to be a cheap means of altering egg size, but their influence on fertilization remains controversial. To determine the relative influences of ovicell size and follicle cell size on fertilization success in the ascidian Styela plicata, the size distribution of eggs that were not successfully fertilized in both high and low sperm concentrations was compared to that of unfertilized controls. At high sperm concentrations, a greater proportion of eggs with smaller ovicells were fertilized, resulting in smaller larvae hatching from this treatment. Eggs with a large follicle cell area relative to ovicell area were preferentially fertilized in both high and low sperm concentration treatments. Hence, follicle cells do not eliminate selection on ovicell size at fertilization in S. plicata. Furthermore, follicle cells appear to increase fertilization success across a range of sperm concentrations by performing different functions in each environment—increasing the target size of eggs in low-sperm concentrations and presumably reducing polyspermy in high sperm concentrations.

Notes

Acknowledgments

AJC and DJM are supported by grants from the Australian Research Council Discovery Scheme.

References

  1. Allen RM, Marshall D (2014) Egg size effects across multiple life-history stages in the marine annelid Hydroides diramphus. PLoS One 9:e102253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allen RM, Buckley YM, Marshall DJ (2008) Offspring size plasticity in response to intraspecific competition: an adaptive maternal effect across life-history stages. Am Nat 171:225–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bernardo J (1996) The particular maternal effect of propagule size, especially egg size: patterns, models, quality of evidence and interpretations. Am Zool 36:216–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bolton TF, Thomas FIM, Leonard CN (2000) Maternal energy investment in eggs and jelly coats surrounding eggs of the echinoid Arbacia punctulata. Biol Bull 199:1–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Burgess SC, Marshall DJ (2014) Adaptive parental effects: the importance of estimating environmental predictability and offspring fitness appropriately. Oikos 123:769–776CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Crean AJ, Marshall DJ (2008) Gamete plasticity in a broadcast spawning marine invertebrate. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105:13508–13513CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Crean AJ, Monro K, Marshall DJ (2011) Fitness consequences of larval traits persist across the metamorphic boundary. Evolution 65:3079–3089CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Crean AJ, Dwyer JM, Marshall DJ (2012) Fertilization is not a new beginning: the relationship between sperm longevity and offspring performance. PLoS ONE 7:e49167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Crean AJ, Dwyer JM, Marshall DJ (2013) Adaptive paternal effects? Experimental evidence that the paternal environment affects offspring performance. Ecology 94:2575–2582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Farley GS, Levitan DR (2001) The role of jelly coats in sperm-egg encounters, fertilization success, and selection on egg size in broadcast spawners. Am Nat 157:626–636CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gagliano M, McCormick MI, Meekan MG (2007) Survival against the odds: ontogenetic changes in selective pressure mediate growth-mortality trade-offs in a marine fish. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 274:1575–1582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kawamura K, Fujita H, Nakauchi M (1988) Helper function of follicle cells in sperm-egg interactions of the ascidian, Ciona intestinalis. Dev Growth Diff 30:693–703CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lambert CC (2009) Ascidian follicle cells: multifunctional adjuncts to maturation and development. Dev Growth Diff 51:677–686CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lambert CC, Lambert G (1981) Formation of the block to polyspermy in ascidian eggs: time course, ion requirements, and role of the accessory cells. J Exp Zool 217:291–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lambert C, Goudeau H, Franchet C, Lambert G, Goudeau M (1997) Ascidian eggs block polyspermy by two independent mechanisms: one at the egg plasma membrane, the other involving the follicle cells. Mol Reprod Dev 48:137–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Levitan DR (1993) The importance of sperm limitation to the evolution of egg size in marine invertebrates. Am Nat 141:517–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Levitan DR (1996) Effects of gamete traits on fertilization in the sea and the evolution of sexual dimorphism. Nature 382:153–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Levitan DR (2000) Optimal egg size in marine invertebrates: theory and phylogenetic analysis of the critical relationship between egg size and development time in echinoids. Am Nat 156:175–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Levitan DR (2004) Density-dependent sexual selection in external fertilizers: variances in male and female fertilization success along the continuum from sperm limitation to sexual conflict in the sea urchin Strongylocentrotus franciscanus. Am Nat 164:298–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Levitan DR (2006) The relationship between egg size and fertilization success in broadcast-spawning marine invertebrates. Integr Comp Biol 46:298–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Levitan DR, Irvine SD (2001) Fertilization selection on egg and jelly-coat size in the sand dollar Dendraster excentricus. Evolution 55:2479–2483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lloyd DG (1987) Selection of offspring size at independence and other size-versus-number strategies. Am Nat 129:800–817CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Marshall DJ, Keough MJ (2008) The evolutionary ecology of offspring size in marine invertebrates. Adv Mar Biol 53:1–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Marshall DJ, Styan CA, Keough MJ (2000) Intraspecific co-variation between egg and body size affects fertilisation kinetics of free-spawning marine invertebrates. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 195:305–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Marshall DJ, Styan CA, Keough MJ (2002) Sperm environment affects offspring quality in broadcast spawning marine invertebrates. Ecol Lett 5:173–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Marshall DJ, Cook CN, Emlet RB (2006) Offspring size effects mediate competitive interactions in a colonial marine invertebrate. Ecology 87:214–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Moran NA (1994) Adaptation and constraint in the complex life-cycles of animals. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 25:573–600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Parker GA, Begon M (1986) Optimal egg size and clutch size—effects of environment and maternal phenotype. Am Nat 128:573–592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Podolsky RD (2001) Evolution of egg target size: an analysis of selection on correlated characters. Evolution 55:2470–2478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Podolsky RD (2002) Fertilization ecology of egg coats: physical versus chemical contributions to fertilization success of free-spawned eggs. J Exp Biol 205:1657–1668Google Scholar
  31. Podolsky RD (2004) Life-history consequences of investment in free-spawned eggs and their accessory coats. Am Nat 163:735–753CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Quinn GP, Keough MJ (2002) Experimental design and data analysis for biologists. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Randerson JP, Hurst LD (2001) The uncertain evolution of the sexes. Trends Ecol Evol 16:571–579CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Smith CC, Fretwell SD (1974) Optimal balance between size and number of offspring. Am Nat 108:499–506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Styan CA (1998) Polyspermy, egg size, and the fertilization kinetics of free-spawning marine invertebrates. Am Nat 152:290–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Villa L, Patricolo E (1993) Role of the follicle cells in ascidian sperm-egg interaction. Anim Biol 2:175–184Google Scholar
  37. Villa LA, Patricolo E (2000) The follicle cells of Styela plicata (Ascidiacea, Tunicata): a SEM study. Zool Sci 17:1115–1121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Yamaguchi M (1975) Growth and reproductive cycles of marine fouling ascidians Ciona intestinalis, Styela plicata, Botrylloides violaceus, and Leptoclinum mitsukurii at Aburatsubo Moroiso Inlet (Central Japan). Mar Biol 29:253–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Evolution and Ecology Research Centre and School of Biological, Earth and Environmental SciencesUniversity of New South WalesSydneyAustralia
  2. 2.Centre for Geometric Biology and School of Biological SciencesMonash UniversityMelbourneAustralia
  3. 3.School of Biological SciencesUniversity of QueenslandBrisbaneAustralia

Personalised recommendations