Questions? Call 888-624-8373

PAPERBACK
list:$45.75
Web:$41.18
add to cart

PDF BOOK
your price: $34.00
add to cart

Rights & Permissions

topleft topright

Chemical Ecology: The Chemistry of Biotic Interaction (1995)
National Academy of Sciences (NAS)

Page
128
bottomleft bottomright

The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.


Chemical Ecology: The Chemistry of Biotic Interaction

the various components of the system operate, we have hypotheses on how the female might selectively retain or expel sets of sperm.

We also have evidence of how the female assesses the size of her mating partners. She appears to do so indirectly, by gauging the size of their spermatophore, for which purpose she may use stretch receptors that female moths are known to have in the chamber (bursa) in which spermatophores are deposited (29). Male Utetheisa can be caused to produce inordinately small spermatophores if they are mated relatively recently beforehand. If such mated males are placed in competition with physically smaller males, whose spermatophores may now be the relatively larger ones, they tend to "lose out" (30). We predict from this that males, in nature, may space their matings days apart. To regain the capacity to produce full size spermatophores takes a male about a week (30).

The female strategy is an interesting one. By accepting multiple partners she can accrue multiple gifts, to her obvious benefit, since she can thereby promote both her fecundity and the survivorship of her offspring. By discriminating between sperm, she is able to select for traits that in the genetic sense have long-range payoff. By favoring sperm of large males the female is essentially reinforcing, after copulation, the choice mechanism that she already exercised in the precopulatory context. Postcopulatory assessment provides the female with the option of taking corrective action. If on a given evening she accepted a male of moderate size and PA content, she can still discriminate genetically against that male by utilizing the sperm of a larger, more PA-laden and therefore genetically superior individual, that she is able to lure on a subsequent night. But the earlier mating is canceled in a genetic sense only. Nutrient and PA that the female receives from the losing male are utilized by her, as are all gifts that she obtains from males (26, 28).

We feel that we may have a tentative answer to the question of why smaller males, of lesser PA content, appear not to "lie" in the context of courtship. Could such males not masquerade as "desirable" by producing exaggerated levels of HD? Perhaps their failure to do so is a reflection of the fact that they would be "found out" unless they also produced outsized spermatophores. Smaller males, even if able to convert extra PA into HD for inflation of their chemical message, may lack the extra nutrient needed for inflation of the spermatophore. By putting the male to the test by way of a second criterion after mating, the female has the means to check on liars.

ADDITIONAL FINDINGS

We discovered in the laboratory that Utetheisa larvae deficient in PA can make up their chemical shortfall by resorting to cannibalism (10, 23).

Page
128