Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Recurso digital |
| Language: | |
| Published: |
Zenodo
2025
|
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17626234 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1866901796394369024 |
|---|---|
| author | Fatema, Akhter |
| author_facet | Fatema, Akhter |
| contents | <p><span>To achieve reproductive success, males typically invest more than their rivals to win fights and secure mating opportunities. Male-male competition can then continue after copulation as sperm competition if females’ mate multiply. While male reproduction often comes at the expense of other fitness-related traits (e.g., growth, immunity), the relative costs of different components of male reproduction (fighting rivals, mating effort or sperm production) are unclear. Addressing this oversight is challenging due to the inherent correlation between different reproductive activities: a male must fight and mate successfully before investing in sperm competition. Here, we conducted an experiment in <em>Gambusia holbrooki</em> to estimate the life-history costs of different reproductive components. To quantify the cost of male-male fighting, we compared life-history traits of males in the presence and absence of rivals. To quantify the cost of sperm investment, we compared life-history traits in males that could or could not release sperm (via ablation surgery) in the presence of rivals. Males that fought with rivals for eight weeks did not show reduced growth, immune response, sperm count or sperm velocity than males that had not fought rivals. Interestingly, males that fought rivals spent significantly less time following females yet achieved the same number of mating attempts, suggesting increased mating efficiency. Conversely, males that repeatedly ejaculated over eight weeks produced significantly fewer sperm than those that could not ejaculate due to ablation. Greater past sperm investment due to the inability to ejaculate also increased the time spent following females but did not affect the number of mating attempts. Our findings show that sperm investment in the presence of rivals reduces a male’s future ability to produce sperm, whereas any life-history costs of physical fighting were undetectable. </span></p> |
| format | Recurso digital |
| id | zenodo_https___doi_org_10_5281_zenodo_17626234 |
| institution | Zenodo |
| language | |
| publishDate | 2025 |
| publisher | Zenodo |
| record_format | zenodo |
| spellingShingle | Disentangling the life-history costs of direct male-male competition and sperm production Fatema, Akhter <p><span>To achieve reproductive success, males typically invest more than their rivals to win fights and secure mating opportunities. Male-male competition can then continue after copulation as sperm competition if females’ mate multiply. While male reproduction often comes at the expense of other fitness-related traits (e.g., growth, immunity), the relative costs of different components of male reproduction (fighting rivals, mating effort or sperm production) are unclear. Addressing this oversight is challenging due to the inherent correlation between different reproductive activities: a male must fight and mate successfully before investing in sperm competition. Here, we conducted an experiment in <em>Gambusia holbrooki</em> to estimate the life-history costs of different reproductive components. To quantify the cost of male-male fighting, we compared life-history traits of males in the presence and absence of rivals. To quantify the cost of sperm investment, we compared life-history traits in males that could or could not release sperm (via ablation surgery) in the presence of rivals. Males that fought with rivals for eight weeks did not show reduced growth, immune response, sperm count or sperm velocity than males that had not fought rivals. Interestingly, males that fought rivals spent significantly less time following females yet achieved the same number of mating attempts, suggesting increased mating efficiency. Conversely, males that repeatedly ejaculated over eight weeks produced significantly fewer sperm than those that could not ejaculate due to ablation. Greater past sperm investment due to the inability to ejaculate also increased the time spent following females but did not affect the number of mating attempts. Our findings show that sperm investment in the presence of rivals reduces a male’s future ability to produce sperm, whereas any life-history costs of physical fighting were undetectable. </span></p> |
| title | Disentangling the life-history costs of direct male-male competition and sperm production |
| url | https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17626234 |