Polyandrous mating in treetops: how male competition and female choice interact to determine an unusual carnivore mating system

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Mia-Lana Lührs (1)
  Peter M. Kappeler (1) (2)
  
• 关键词：Polyandry ; Female choice ; Male–male competition ; Mating system ; Female dominance ; Cryptoprocta ferox
• 刊名：Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology
• 出版年：2014
• 出版时间：June 2014
• 年：2014
• 卷：68
• 期：6
• 页码：879-889
• 全文大小：
• 参考文献：1. Albignac R (1969) Naissance et élevage en captivité de jeunes / Cryptoprocta ferox, Viverridae malgaches. Mammalia 33:93-7 CrossRef
  2. Albignac R (1970) Notes éthologiques sur quelques carnivores malgaches: le / Cryptoprocta ferox (Bennett). Terre Vie-Rev Ecol A 24:395-02
  3. Albignac R (1973) Mammifères carnivores. O.R.S.T.O.M, Paris
  4. Arnqvist G, Nilsson T (2000) The evolution of polyandry: multiple mating and female fitness in insects. Anim Behav 60:145-64 CrossRef
  5. Arnqvist G, Rowe L (1995) Sexual conflict and arms races between the sexes: a morphological adaptation for control of mating in a female insect. Proc R Soc Lond B 261:123-27 CrossRef
  6. Baer B, Schmid-Hempel P (1999) Experimental variation in polyandry affects parasite loads and fitness in a bumble-bee. Nature 397:151-54 CrossRef
  7. Bellemain E, Swenson JE, Taberlet P (2006a) Mating strategies in relation to sexually selected infanticide in a non-social carnivore: the brown bear. Ethology 112:238-46 CrossRef
  8. Bellemain E, Zedrosser A, Manel S, Waits LP, Taberlet P, Swenson JE (2006b) The dilemma of female mate selection in the brown bear, a species with sexually selected infanticide. Proc R Soc Lond B 273:283-91 CrossRef
  9. Bercovitch FB (1988) Coalitions, cooperation and reproductive tactics among adult male baboons. Anim Behav 36:1198-209 CrossRef
  10. Birkhead TR (2000) Promiscuity: an evolutionary history of sperm competition. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
  11. Birkhead T, M?ller A (1993) Female control of paternity. Trends Ecol Evol 8:100-04 CrossRef
  12. Birkhead TR, M?ller AP (1998) Sperm competition and sexual selection. Academic, San Diego
  13. Birkhead TR, Pizzari T (2002) Postcopulatory sexual selection. Nat Rev Genet 3:262-73 CrossRef
  14. Brown JL (1997) A theory of mate choice based on heterozygosity. Behav Ecol 8:60-5 CrossRef
  15. Bygott JD, Bertram BCR, Hanby JP (1979) Male lions in large coalitions gain reproductive advantages. Nature 282:839-41 CrossRef
  16. Calenge C (2006) The package “adehabitat-for the R software: a tool for the analysis of space and habitat use by animals. Ecol Model 197:516-19 CrossRef
  17. Chapman T, Liddle LF, Kalb JM, Wolfner MF, Partridge L (1995) Cost of mating in / Drosophila melanogaster females is mediated by male accessory gland products. Nature 373:241-44 CrossRef
  18. Chapman T, Arnqvist G, Bangham J, Rowe L (2003) Sexual conflict. Trends Ecol Evol 18:41-7 CrossRef
  19. Clutton-Brock TH, Parker GA (1995) Sexual coercion in animal societies. Anim Behav 49:1345-365 CrossRef
  20. Daly M (1978) The cost of mating. Am Nat 112:771-74 CrossRef
  21. Dewar RE, Richard AF (2007) Evolution in the hypervariable environment of Madagascar. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 104:13723-3727 CrossRef
  22. Dickie L (2005) The behaviour and reproductive physiology of the fossa ( / Cryptoprocta ferox) in captivity. PhD thesis, Queen Mary University of London
  23. Duffy KG, Wrangham RW, Silk JB (2007) Male chimpanzees exchange political support for mating opportunities. Curr Biol 17:R586–R587 CrossRef
  24. East ML, Hofer H (2001) Male spotted hyenas ( / Crocuta crocuta) queue for status in social groups dominated by females. Behav Ecol 12:558-68 CrossRef
  25. East ML, Burke T, Wilhelm K, Greig C, Hofer H (2003) Sexual conflicts in spotted hyenas: male and female mating tactics and their reproductive outcome with respect to age, social status and tenure. Proc R Soc Lond B 270:1247-254 CrossRef
  26. Ebensperger LA (1998) Strategies and counterstrategies to infanticide in mammals. Biol Rev 73:321-46 CrossRef
  27. Eberhard WG (1996) Female control: sexual selection by cryptic female choice. Princeton University Press, Princeton
  28. Eberle M, Kappeler PM (2004) Sex in the dark: determinants and consequences of mixed male mating tactics in / Microcebus murinus, a small solitary nocturnal primate. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 57:77-0 CrossRef
  29. Fisher DO, Cockburn A (2006) The large-male advantage in brown antechinuses: female choice, male dominance, and delayed male death. Behav Ecol 17:164-71 CrossRef
  30. Hawkins CE, Racey PA (2005) Low population density of a tropical forest carnivore, / Cryptoprocta ferox: implications for protected area management. Oryx 39:35-3 CrossRef
  31. Hawkins CE, Racey PA (2009) A novel mating system in a solitary carnivore: the fossa. J Zool 277:196-04 CrossRef
  32. Hawkins CE, Dallas JF, Fowler PA, Woodroffe R, Racey PA (2002) Transient masculinization in the fossa, / Cryptoprocta ferox (Carnivora, Viverridae). Biol Reprod 66:610-15 CrossRef
  33. Hooge PN, Eichenlaub B (2000) Animal movement extension to Arcview. ver. 2.0. Alaska Science Centere-Biological Science Office, U.S. Geological Survey, Anchorage
  34. Hoogland JL (1998) Why do female Gunnison’s prairie dogs copulate with more than one male? Anim Behav 55:351-59 CrossRef
  35. Hosken DJ, Stockley P (2003) Benefits of polyandry: a life history perspective. Evol Biol 33:173-94
  36. Hrdy SB (1979) Infanticide among animals: a review, classification, and examination of the implications for the reproductive strategies of females. Ethol Sociobiol 1:13-0 CrossRef
  37. Huchard E, Canale CI, Le Gros C, Perret M, Henry PY, Kappeler PM (2012) Convenience polyandry or convenience polygyny? Costly sex under female control in a promiscuous primate. Proc R Soc Lond B 279:1371-379 CrossRef
  38. Hunter FM, Petrie M, Otronen M, Birkhead TR, M?ller AP (1993) Why do females copulate repeatedly with one male? Trends Ecol Evol 8:21-6 CrossRef
  39. Iossa G, Soulsbury CD, Baker PJ, Harris S (2008) Sperm competition and the evolution of testes size in terrestrial mammalian carnivores. Funct Ecol 22:655-62 CrossRef
  40. Jennions MD, Petrie M (2000) Why do females mate multiply? A review of the genetic benefits. Biol Rev 75:21-4 CrossRef
  41. Kenward RE (2001) A manual for wildlife radiotracking. Academic, London
  42. Knott CD, Emery Thompson M, Stumpf RM, McIntyre MH (2010) Female reproductive strategies in orangutans, evidence for female choice and counterstrategies to infanticide in a species with frequent sexual coercion. Proc R Soc Lond B 277:105-13 CrossRef
  43. Kvarnemo C, Simmons LW (2013) Polyandry as a mediator of sexual selection before and after mating. Philos T Roy Soc B 368:20120042 CrossRef
  44. Lührs ML, Kappeler PM (2013) Simultaneous GPS tracking reveals male associations in a solitary carnivore. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 67:1731-743 CrossRef
  45. Lührs ML, Dammhahn M, Kappeler PM (2013) Strength in numbers: males in a carnivore grow bigger when they associate and hunt cooperatively. Behav Ecol 24:21-8 CrossRef
  46. Mohr CO (1947) Table of equivalent populations of North American small mammals. Am Midl Nat 37:223-49 CrossRef
  47. Mundry R, Nunn CL (2009) Stepwise model fitting and statistical inference: turning noise into signal pollution. Am Nat 173:119-23 CrossRef
  48. Newcomer SD, Zeh JA, Zeh DW (1999) Genetic benefits enhance the reproductive success of polyandrous females. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 96:10236-0241 CrossRef
  49. No? R, Sluijter AA (1990) Reproductive tactics of male savanna baboons. Behaviour 113:117-70 CrossRef
  50. Packer C, Herbst L, Pusey AE, Bygott JD, Cairns SJ, Hanby JP, Borgerhoff-Mulder M (1988) Reproductive success of lions. In: Clutton-Brock TH (ed) Reproductive success. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 363-83
  51. Parker GA (1970) Sperm competition and its evolutionary consequences in the insects. Biol Rev 45:525-67 CrossRef
  52. Peig J, Green AJ (2009) New perspectives for estimating body condition from mass/length data: the scaled mass index as an alternative method. Oikos 118:1883-891 CrossRef
  53. Preston BT, Stevenson IR, Pemberton JM, Coltman DW, Wilson K (2003) Overt and covert competition in a promiscuous mammal: the importance of weaponry and testes size to male reproductive success. Proc R Soc Lond B 270:633-40 CrossRef
  54. R Development Core Team (2011) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna
  55. Ridley M (1988) Mating frequency and fecundity in insects. Biol Rev 63:509-49 CrossRef
  56. Rood JP (1990) Group size, survival, reproduction, and routes to breeding in dwarf mongooses. Anim Behav 39:566-72 CrossRef
  57. Rowe L (1992) Convenience polyandry in a water strider: foraging conflicts and female control of copulation frequency and guarding duration. Anim Behav 44:189-02 CrossRef
  58. Rowe L (1994) The costs of mating and mate choice in water striders. Anim Behav 48:1049-056 CrossRef
  59. Rowe L, Arnqvist G, Sih A, Krupa JJ (1994) Sexual conflict and the evolutionary ecology of mating patterns: water striders as a model system. Trends Ecol Evol 9:289-93 CrossRef
  60. Simmons LW (2005) The evolution of polyandry: sperm competition, sperm selection, and offspring viability. Annu Rev Ecol Evol S 36:125-46 CrossRef
  61. Slatyer RA, Mautz BS, Backwell PRY, Jennions MD (2012a) Estimating genetic benefits of polyandry from experimental studies: a meta-analysis. Biol Rev 87:1-3 CrossRef
  62. Slatyer RA, Jennions MD, Backwell PRY (2012b) Polyandry occurs because females initially trade sex for protection. Anim Behav 83:1203-206 CrossRef
  63. Smith RL (1984) Sperm competition and the evolution of animal mating systems. Academic, Orlando
  64. Smuts BB, Smuts RW (1993) Male aggression and sexual coercion of females in nonhuman primates and other mammals: evidence and theoretical implications. Adv Stud Behav 22:1-3 CrossRef
  65. Stumpf R, Emery Thompson M, Knott C (2008) A comparison of female mating strategies in / Pan troglodytes and / Pongo spp. Int J Primatol 29:865-84 CrossRef
  66. Swenson JE, Sandegren F, Brunberg S, Segerstr?m P (2001) Factors associated with loss of brown bear cubs in Sweden. Ursus 12:69-0
  67. Taborsky M, Brockmann HJ (2010) Alternative reproductive tactics and life history phenotypes. In: Kappeler P (ed) Animal behaviour: evolution and mechanisms. Springer, Berlin, pp 537-86 CrossRef
  68. Thornhill R, Alcock J (1983) The evolution of insect mating systems. Harvard University Press, Cambridge CrossRef
  69. Watts DP (1998) Coalitionary mate guarding by male chimpanzees at Ngogo, Kibale National Park, Uganda. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 44:43-5 CrossRef
  70. Wiley RH, Poston J (1996) Perspective: indirect mate choice, competition for mates, and coevolution of the sexes. Evolution 50:1371-381 CrossRef
  71. Wolff JO, Macdonald DW (2004) Promiscuous females protect their offspring. Trends Ecol Evol 19:127-34 CrossRef
  72. Yasui Y (1998) The ‘genetic benefits-of female multiple mating reconsidered. Trends Ecol Evol 13:246-50 CrossRef
  73. Zeh JA, Zeh DW (1997) The evolution of polyandry II: post-copulatory defenses against genetic incompatibility. Proc R Soc Lond B 264:69-5 CrossRef
  
• 作者单位：Mia-Lana Lührs (1)
  Peter M. Kappeler (1) (2)
  
  1. Department of Sociobiology/Anthropology, Johann-Friedrich-Blumenbach-Institute of Zoology and Anthropology, Georg-August-University, Kellnerweg 6, 37077, G?ttingen, Germany
  2. Behavioral Ecology & Sociobiology Unit, German Primate Center, Leibniz Institute for Primate Research, Kellnerweg 4, 37077, G?ttingen, Germany
  
• ISSN：1432-0762

文摘

The diversity of mammalian mating systems is primarily shaped by sex-specific reproductive strategies. In the present study, we explored determinants and consequences of a unique mating system exhibited by fossas (Cryptoprocta ferox), the largest Malagasy carnivore, where females mate polyandrously on traditional mating trees, and males exhibit intrasexual size dimorphism. Males face both contest and scramble competition, and inter-sexual size dimorphism can be pronounced, but its magnitude depends on the male morph. Using a continuous behavioral observation of six estrous females over 4?years, we investigated correlates of male contest competition and female choice based on 316 copulations. Furthermore, we assessed correlates of male scramble competition based on testes size and movement data obtained from GPS tracking. We found that females dominated males regardless of their smaller size and that females actively solicited copulations. Heavy males had highest mating success during the female’s peak mating activity, but were discriminated against afterwards. Female choice and male–male competition thus converged to generate a mating advantage for heavier males. Our results suggest that females actively seek polyandrous matings, presumably for indirect genetic benefits. Since body mass is the major determinant of male mating success and is at the same time dependent on the degree of sociality and associated hunting mode of the respective male morph, a male’s feeding ecology is likely to influence its reproductive tactic. A combination of benefits from female polyandry and the consequences of different subsistence strategies may thus ultimately explain this unusual mating system.