Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Risk of sperm competition does not influence copulatory behavior in the promiscuous meadow vole (Microtus pennsylvanicus)

  • Article
  • Published:
Journal of Ethology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

It is not clear whether males in all mammalian species adjust their copulatory behavior when faced with risk of sperm competition (RSC). Previous work on meadow voles, Microtus pennsylvanicus, indicated that males increase their sperm expenditure but not the number of ejaculations in the presence of odors of a conspecific male. The present study follows up on this work and asks whether male meadow voles modify any aspect of their copulatory behavior when they face a RSC. We examined 46 variables of copulatory behavior and found that the presence of odors from a conspecific male did not affect any of these variables. Thus, male meadow voles, unlike some other species of mammals, do not adjust their copulatory behavior when exposed to cues associated with an elevated RSC.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adler NT, Toner JP (1986) The effects of copulatory behavior on sperm transport and fertility in rats. Ann N Y Acad Sci 474:21–32

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Beatty RA (1960) Fertility of mixed semen from different rabbits. J Reprod Fertil 1:52–60

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Birkhead TR, Møller AP (1998) Sperm competition and sexual selection. Academic, San Diego, CA

  • Busse CD, Estep DQ (1984) Sexual arousal in male pigtailed monkeys (Macaca nemestrina): effects of serial matings by two males. J Comp Psychol 98:227–231

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Candolin U, Reynolds JD (2002) Adjustments of ejaculation rates in response to risk of sperm competition in a fish, the bitterling (Rhodeus sericeus). Proc R Soc Lond B269:1549–1553

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clulow FV, Mallory FF (1970) Oestrus and induced ovulation in the meadow vole, Microtus pennsylvanicus. J Reprod Fertil 23:341–343

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Clutton-Brock TH (1989) Mammalian mating systems. Proc R Soc Lond B236:339–372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. LEA, Hillsdale, NJ

  • Colgreave N, Ruxton GD (2003) Confidence intervals are a more useful complement to nonsignificant tests than are power calculations. Behav Ecol 14:446–450

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • delBarco-Trillo J, Ferkin MH (2004) Male mammals respond to a risk of sperm competition conveyed by odours of conspecific males. Nature 431:446–449

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • delBarco-Trillo J, Ferkin MH (2006) Male meadow voles respond differently to risk and intensity of sperm competition. Behav Ecol 17:581–585

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dewsbury DA (1972) Patterns of copulatory behavior in male mammals. Q Rev Biol 47:1–33

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dewsbury DA (1981) On the function of the multiple-intromission multiple-ejaculation copulatory patterns of rodents. Bull Psychon Soc 18:221–223

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewsbury DA (1984) Sperm competition in muroid rodents. In: Smith RL (ed) Sperm competition and the evolution of animal mating systems. Academic, New York, pp 547–571

  • Dewsbury DA (1985) Interactions between males and their sperm during multi-male copulatory episodes of deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus). Anim Behav 33:1266–1274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dewsbury DA (1993) Sperm competition and effects of mating order on copulatory behavior in meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus). Bull Psychon Soc 31:437–439

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewsbury DA, Baumgardner DJ (1981) Studies of sperm competition in two species of muroid rodents. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 9:121–133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elgar MA, Champion de Crespigny FE, Ramamurthy S (2003) Male copulation behaviour and the risk of sperm competition. Anim Behav 66:211–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Estep DQ (1988) Copulations by other males shorten the post-ejaculatory intervals of pairs of roof rats, Rattus rattus. Anim Behav 38:299–300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gage MJG (1991) Risk of sperm competition directly affects ejaculate size in the mediterranean fruit fly. Anim Behav 42:1036–1037

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ginsberg JR, Rubenstein DI (1990) Sperm competition and variation in zebra mating behaviour. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 26:427–434

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray GD, Dewsbury DA (1975) A quantitative description of the copulation behaviour of meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus). Anim Behav 23:261–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harcourt AH, Gardiner J (1994) Sexual selection and genital anatomy of male primates. Proc R Soc Lond B255:47–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hardy DF, DeBold JF (1972) Effects of coital stimulation upon behavior of the female rat. J Comp Physiol Psychol 78:400–408

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hogg JT (1988) Copulatory tactics in relation to sperm competition in Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 22:49–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lanier DL, Estep DQ, Dewsbury DA (1979) Role of prolonged copulatory behavior in facilitating reproductive success in a competitive mating situation in laboratory rats. J Comp Physiol Psychol 93:781–792

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lezama V, Orihuela A, Angulo R (2001) Sexual behavior and semen characteristics of rams exposed to their own semen or semen from a different ram on the vulva of the ewe. Appl Anim Behav Sci 75:55–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin PA, Reimers TJ, Lodge JR, Dziuk PJ (1974) The effect of ratios and numbers of spermatozoa mixed from males on the proportion of offspring. J Reprod Fertil 39:251–258

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Milligan SR (1982) Induced ovulation in mammals. Oxf Rev Reprod Biol 4:1–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Oglesby JM, Lanier DL, Dewsbury DA (1981) The role of prolonged copulatory behavior in facilitating reproductive success in male Syrian golden hamsters (Mesocricetus auratus) in a competitive mating situation. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 8:47–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker GA (1970) Sperm competition and its evolutionary consequences in insects. Biol Rev 45:524–567

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker GA (1993) Sperm competition games: sperm size and sperm number under adult control. Proc R Soc Lond B 253:245–254

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Parker GA, Ball MA, Stockley P, Gage MJG (1997) Sperm competition games: a prospective analysis of risk assessment. Proc R Soc Lond B264:1793–1802

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pizzari T, Cornwallis CK, Lovlie H, Jakobsoon S, Birkhead TR (2003) Sophisticated sperm allocation in male fowl. Nature 426:70–74

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pound N, Gage MJG (2004) Prudent sperm allocation in Norway rats, Rattus norvegicus: a mammalian model of adaptive ejaculate adjustment. Anim Behav 68:819–823

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preston BT, Stockley P (2006) The prospect of sexual competition stimulates premature and repeated ejaculation in a mammal. Curr Biol 16:R239–R241

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro LE, Dewsbury DA (1986) Male dominance, female choice and male copulatory behavior in two species of voles (Microtus ochrogaster and Microtus montanus). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 18:267–274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stockley P (2002) Sperm competition risk and male genital anatomy: comparative evidence for reduced duration of female sexual receptivity in primates with penile spines. Evol Ecol 16:123–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stockley P, Preston BT (2004) Sperm competition and diversity in rodent copulatory behaviour. J Evol Biol 17:1048–1057

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas L (1997) Retrospective power analysis. Conserv Biol 11:276–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wedell N, Cook PA (1999) Butterflies tailor their ejaculate in response to sperm competition risk and intensity. Proc R Soc Lond B266:1033–1039

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wynne-Edwards KE, Lisk RD (1988) Differences in behavioral responses to a competitive mating situation in two species of dwarf hamster (Phodopus campbelli and P. sungorus). J Comp Psychol 102:49–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Bunty Ethington and Maciej Biernacki for statistical advice. This work was supported by a Sigma Xi Grant-in-Aid of Research to J.d.-T., and NSF grant IBB-044553 and NIH grant MH-91971 to M.H.F.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biology, University of Memphis, Ellington Hall, Memphis, TN, 38152, USA

    Javier delBarco-Trillo & Michael H. Ferkin

  2. Department of Psychology, Cornell University, Uris Hall, Ithaca, NY, 14853, USA

    Javier delBarco-Trillo

Authors
  1. Javier delBarco-Trillo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael H. Ferkin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Javier delBarco-Trillo.

About this article

Cite this article

delBarco-Trillo, J., Ferkin, M.H. Risk of sperm competition does not influence copulatory behavior in the promiscuous meadow vole (Microtus pennsylvanicus). J Ethol 25, 139–145 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10164-006-0008-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10164-006-0008-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation