Does the potential strength of sexual selection differ between mating systems with and without defensive behaviours? A meta-analysis

IF 11 1区 生物学 Q1 BIOLOGY
Renato C. Macedo-Rego, Michael D. Jennions, Eduardo S. A. Santos
{"title":"Does the potential strength of sexual selection differ between mating systems with and without defensive behaviours? A meta-analysis","authors":"Renato C. Macedo-Rego,&nbsp;Michael D. Jennions,&nbsp;Eduardo S. A. Santos","doi":"10.1111/brv.13078","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>The Darwin–Bateman paradigm predicts that females enhance their fitness by being choosy and mating with high-quality males, while males should compete to mate with as many females as possible. In many species, males enhance their fitness by defending females and/or resources used by females. That is, males directly defend access to mating opportunities. However, paternity analyses have repeatedly shown that females in most species mate polyandrously, which contradicts traditional expectations that male defensive behaviours lead to monandry. Here, in an extensive meta-analysis, encompassing 109 species and 1026 effect sizes from across the animal kingdom, we tested if the occurrence of defensive behaviours modulates sexual selection on females and males. If so, we can illuminate the extent to which males really succeed in defending access to mating and fertilisation opportunities. We used four different indices of the opportunity for sexual selection that comprise pre-mating and/or post-mating episodes of selection. We found, for both sexes, that the occurrence of defensive behaviours does not modulate the potential strength of sexual selection. This implies that male defensive behaviours do not predict the true intensity of sexual selection. While the most extreme levels of sexual selection on males are in species with male defensive behaviours, which indicates that males do sometimes succeed in restricting females' re-mating ability (e.g. elephant seals, <i>Mirounga leonina</i>), estimates of the opportunity for sexual selection vary greatly across species, regardless of whether or not defensive behaviours occur. Indeed, widespread polyandry shows that females are usually not restricted by male defensive behaviours. In addition, our results indicate that post-mating episodes of selection, such as cryptic female choice and sperm competition, might be important factors modulating the opportunity for sexual selection. We discuss: (<i>i</i>) why male defensive behaviours fail to lower the opportunity for sexual selection among females or fail to elevate it for males; (<i>ii</i>) how post-mating events might influence sexual selection; and (<i>iii</i>) the role of females as active participants in sexual selection. We also highlight that inadequate data reporting in the literature prevented us from extracting effect sizes from many studies that had presumably collected the relevant data.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":133,"journal":{"name":"Biological Reviews","volume":"99 4","pages":"1504-1523"},"PeriodicalIF":11.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biological Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/brv.13078","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Darwin–Bateman paradigm predicts that females enhance their fitness by being choosy and mating with high-quality males, while males should compete to mate with as many females as possible. In many species, males enhance their fitness by defending females and/or resources used by females. That is, males directly defend access to mating opportunities. However, paternity analyses have repeatedly shown that females in most species mate polyandrously, which contradicts traditional expectations that male defensive behaviours lead to monandry. Here, in an extensive meta-analysis, encompassing 109 species and 1026 effect sizes from across the animal kingdom, we tested if the occurrence of defensive behaviours modulates sexual selection on females and males. If so, we can illuminate the extent to which males really succeed in defending access to mating and fertilisation opportunities. We used four different indices of the opportunity for sexual selection that comprise pre-mating and/or post-mating episodes of selection. We found, for both sexes, that the occurrence of defensive behaviours does not modulate the potential strength of sexual selection. This implies that male defensive behaviours do not predict the true intensity of sexual selection. While the most extreme levels of sexual selection on males are in species with male defensive behaviours, which indicates that males do sometimes succeed in restricting females' re-mating ability (e.g. elephant seals, Mirounga leonina), estimates of the opportunity for sexual selection vary greatly across species, regardless of whether or not defensive behaviours occur. Indeed, widespread polyandry shows that females are usually not restricted by male defensive behaviours. In addition, our results indicate that post-mating episodes of selection, such as cryptic female choice and sperm competition, might be important factors modulating the opportunity for sexual selection. We discuss: (i) why male defensive behaviours fail to lower the opportunity for sexual selection among females or fail to elevate it for males; (ii) how post-mating events might influence sexual selection; and (iii) the role of females as active participants in sexual selection. We also highlight that inadequate data reporting in the literature prevented us from extracting effect sizes from many studies that had presumably collected the relevant data.

有防御行为和无防御行为的交配系统之间性选择的潜在强度是否不同?荟萃分析
根据达尔文-贝特曼范式的预测,雌性会通过精挑细选并与高质量的雄性交配来提高自身的适应能力,而雄性则应竞相与尽可能多的雌性交配。在许多物种中,雄性通过保护雌性和/或雌性使用的资源来提高自身的适应力。也就是说,雄性直接捍卫交配机会。然而,亲子鉴定分析一再表明,大多数物种中的雌性都是多雄性交配,这与雄性防御行为导致一夫一妻制的传统预期相矛盾。在这里,我们通过一项广泛的荟萃分析(涵盖动物界的 109 个物种和 1026 个效应大小),检验了防御行为的发生是否会调节对雌性和雄性的性选择。如果是这样,我们就能揭示雄性在多大程度上真正成功地捍卫了交配和受精的机会。我们使用了四种不同的性选择机会指数,其中包括交配前和/或交配后的选择事件。我们发现,对于雄性和雌性来说,防御行为的发生并不会调节性选择的潜在强度。这意味着雄性的防御行为并不能预测性选择的真实强度。虽然雄性的性选择在具有雄性防御行为的物种中达到了最极端的水平,这表明雄性有时确实能成功地限制雌性的再交配能力(如象海豹,Mirounga leonina),但在不同物种中,无论是否出现防御行为,对性选择机会的估计都有很大差异。事实上,广泛存在的一夫多妻制表明,雌性通常不会受到雄性防御行为的限制。此外,我们的研究结果表明,交配后的选择事件,如隐性雌性选择和精子竞争,可能是调节性选择机会的重要因素。我们将讨论(i) 为什么雄性的防御行为不能降低雌性的性选择机会或不能提高雄性的性选择机会;(ii) 交配后事件如何影响性选择;(iii) 雌性作为性选择的积极参与者的作用。我们还强调,由于文献中的数据报告不充分,我们无法从许多可能已经收集了相关数据的研究中提取效应大小。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Biological Reviews
Biological Reviews 生物-生物学
CiteScore
21.30
自引率
2.00%
发文量
99
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Biological Reviews is a scientific journal that covers a wide range of topics in the biological sciences. It publishes several review articles per issue, which are aimed at both non-specialist biologists and researchers in the field. The articles are scholarly and include extensive bibliographies. Authors are instructed to be aware of the diverse readership and write their articles accordingly. The reviews in Biological Reviews serve as comprehensive introductions to specific fields, presenting the current state of the art and highlighting gaps in knowledge. Each article can be up to 20,000 words long and includes an abstract, a thorough introduction, and a statement of conclusions. The journal focuses on publishing synthetic reviews, which are based on existing literature and address important biological questions. These reviews are interesting to a broad readership and are timely, often related to fast-moving fields or new discoveries. A key aspect of a synthetic review is that it goes beyond simply compiling information and instead analyzes the collected data to create a new theoretical or conceptual framework that can significantly impact the field. Biological Reviews is abstracted and indexed in various databases, including Abstracts on Hygiene & Communicable Diseases, Academic Search, AgBiotech News & Information, AgBiotechNet, AGRICOLA Database, GeoRef, Global Health, SCOPUS, Weed Abstracts, and Reaction Citation Index, among others.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信