| Abstract: | Selection acting on individuals is not predicted to maximize population persistence, yet examples that explicitly quantify conflicts between individual and population level benefits are scarce. One such conflict occurs over sexual reproduction because of the cost of sex: sexual populations that suffer the cost of producing males have only half the growth rate compared to asexuals. Male behaviour can additionally impact population dynamics in a variety of ways, and here we study an example where the impact is unusually clear: the riddle of persistence of sperm‐dependent sexual–asexual species complexes. Here, a sexually reproducing host species coexists with an ameiotically reproducing all‐female sperm parasite. Sexual–asexual coexistence should not be stable because the proportion of asexually reproducing females will rapidly increase and the relative abundance of the sexually reproducing host species will decline. A severe shortage of males will lead to sperm limitation for sexual and asexual females and the system collapses. Male mate choice could reduce the reproductive potential of the asexual species and thus potentially prevent the collapse. In the gynogenetic (sperm‐dependent parthenogenetic) Amazon molly Poecilia formosa and its host (P. latipinna or P. mexicana), males discriminate against asexual females to some extent. Using a population‐dynamical model, we examine the population dynamics of this species complex with varying strengths of male discrimination ability and efficiency with which they locate females and produce sperm. The sexual species would benefit from stronger discrimination, thus preventing being displaced by the asexual females. However, males would be required to evolve preferences that are probably too strong to be purely based upon selection acting on individuals. We conclude that male behaviour does not fully prevent but delays extinction, yet this is highly relevant because low local extinction rates strongly promote coexistence as a metapopulation. |
