Male boobies expel eggs when paternity is in doubt

We analyzed the effect of increased risk of cuckoldry on maleparental investment in eggs in the colonial blue-footed booby(Sula nebouxii). Seventeen experimental males were removedfrom the nesting territory for 10-12 h on a single day, 1-5days before laying (females' supposed fertile period = SFP),and 17 control males were removed for the same amount of timeon a single day, 7-29 days before laying (before the SFP).These removals were intended to simulate extended absence fromthe nest on a foraging excursion. Female extrapair courtshipand copulation rates did not increase during the removal ofthe social mate, and there was no evidence that experimentaland control males differed quantitatively in incubation ordefense of the clutch. However, 43% of experimental males expelledthe first-laid egg from the nest, whereas no control male didso. Apparently, male boobies drastically reduce parental investmentin eggs with a presumed elevated probability of extrapair fertilizationby destroying them.     

Male share of provisioning is not influenced by actual or apparent loss of paternity in western bluebirds

Approximately 45% of western bluebird (Sialia mexicana) femaleshave some chicks in the nest that are not sired by their socialmates. Extrapair fertilizations account for 42% of offspringin these nests and 19% of nestlings overall. I tested the hypothesisthat males reduce nestling provisioning when their certaintyof paternity or share of paternity is reduced. Capture and detentionof socially monogamous males for 1 h or 24 h during the layingperiod reduced males' copulatory access and their ability tomate guard, increasing the frequency with which extrapair malesintruded and attempted to copulate with resident females. Malesdetained during laying did not reduce their share of feedingtrips compared to control males detained during incubation,compared to unmanipulated males, or compared to males that werecaptured but not detained. Males detained on territory for 1h during the laying period did not reduce their share of feedingtrips when they observed male intrusion, nor when they observedtheir mates accepting extrapair copulations. Males that witnessedtheir mates accepting extrapair copulations did not reduce theirshare of risk in provisioning. Genetic fingerprinting at nonexperimentalnests indicated that males also failed to reduce their feedingcontributions when their estimated share of paternity was reduced,even when a helper male was present to reduce the impact onnestlings. These results suggest that male western bluebirdsdo not make significant adjustments in their share of provisioningwhen they have evidence of partial paternity loss. Togetherwith prior results, this study suggests that western bluebirdmales use an all-or-none rule, contributing approximately halfof the parental provisioning at nests, as long they have somecopulatory access to the female during egg laying.     

Male reed buntings do not adjust parental effort in relation to extrapair paternity

Parental effort is considered to be costly; therefore, malesare expected to provide less care to unrelated offspring. Theoreticalmodels suggest that males should either reduce their care tothe entire brood or alternatively distinguish between relatedand unrelated nestlings and direct provisioning to kin whenpaternity is in doubt. Reed buntings (Emberiza schoeniclus)have been found to have high levels of extrapair paternity (EPP,i.e., offspring of a male other than the male attending thenest; 55% of offspring), and males are therefore under strongselection pressure to adjust their parental effort accordingto the proportion of EPP in their brood. In this study, we investigatedwhether male reed buntings exhibit a reduction in paternal care(incubation and provisioning nestlings) in relation to decreasedpaternity. We also assess whether males bias their provisioningtoward kin. We measured incubation time, provisioning rates,and food allocation to individual nestlings using video recordingsat the nests. Microsatellite DNA analysis was used to analyzethe paternity of offspring. In direct contrast to a previousstudy on the same species, our results provided no indicationthat males lowered their effort with decreased paternity. Furthermore,in nests of mixed paternity, males did not bias their provisioningbehavior to kin. It remains to be investigated whether the absenceof a relationship between paternity and paternal care can beascribed to absence of reliable paternity cues or whether thebenefits of reducing paternal care did not outweigh the costsin our study population. We found no evidence that the levelof paternal care affected male survival or offspring mass, suggestingthat both the benefits and costs of any reduction in paternalcare would have been low.     

Parental investment, sexual selection and sex ratios

Conventional sex roles imply caring females and competitive males. The evolution of sex role divergence is widely attributed to anisogamy initiating a self‐reinforcing process. The initial asymmetry in pre‐mating parental investment (eggs vs. sperm) is assumed to promote even greater divergence in post‐mating parental investment (parental care). But do we really understand the process? Trivers [Sexual Selection and the Descent of Man 1871–1971 (1972), Aldine Press, Chicago] introduced two arguments with a female and male perspective on whether to care for offspring that try to link pre‐mating and post‐mating investment. Here we review their merits and subsequent theoretical developments. The first argument is that females are more committed than males to providing care because they stand to lose a greater initial investment. This, however, commits the ‘Concorde Fallacy’ as optimal decisions should depend on future pay‐offs not past costs. Although the argument can be rephrased in terms of residual reproductive value when past investment affects future pay‐offs, it remains weak. The factors likely to change future pay‐offs seem to work against females providing more care than males. The second argument takes the reasonable premise that anisogamy produces a male‐biased operational sex ratio (OSR) leading to males competing for mates. Male care is then predicted to be less likely to evolve as it consumes resources that could otherwise be used to increase competitiveness. However, given each offspring has precisely two genetic parents (the Fisher condition), a biased OSR generates frequency‐dependent selection, analogous to Fisherian sex ratio selection, that favours increased parental investment by whichever sex faces more intense competition. Sex role divergence is therefore still an evolutionary conundrum. Here we review some possible solutions. Factors that promote conventional sex roles are sexual selection on males (but non‐random variance in male mating success must be high to override the Fisher condition), loss of paternity because of female multiple mating or group spawning and patterns of mortality that generate female‐biased adult sex ratios (ASR). We present an integrative model that shows how these factors interact to generate sex roles. We emphasize the need to distinguish between the ASR and the operational sex ratio (OSR). If mortality is higher when caring than competing this diminishes the likelihood of sex role divergence because this strongly limits the mating success of the earlier deserting sex. We illustrate this in a model where a change in relative mortality rates while caring and competing generates a shift from a mammalian type breeding system (female‐only care, male‐biased OSR and female‐biased ASR) to an avian type system (biparental care and a male‐biased OSR and ASR).     

Male brood care without paternity increases mating success

We investigate under which conditions we can expect the evolutionof costly male care for unrelated offspring, when the benefitof such care is in the form of increased mating success. Thisapplies to male helping behavior that cannot be explained aspaternal care because the male's own offspring does not benefitfrom his behavior. Our model shows that caring for others' offspringcan be a stable strategy for males, if a male that does not"help" loses mating opportunities, for example if females discriminateagainst non-helping males as mating partners. This is possiblewhen females are polyandrous. Increasing population densitydecreases the parameter region where male care is stable. Malecare is also more likely to be stable when male mortality rateis higher than that of females. We discuss the results withspecial reference to the golden egg bug Phyllomorpha laciniata,where females lay eggs on conspecifics, often on males beforemating. Males therefore carry mostly unrelated eggs. We investigatehow oviposition rate and female mating rate influences whenegg carrying is an evolutionary stable strategy. We concludethat in the golden egg bug, male egg carrying could be explainedas a form of mating investment.     

The unexpected but understandable dynamics of mating,paternity and paternal care in the ocellated wrasse

Although theory generally predicts that males should reduce paternal care in response to cues that predict increased sperm competition and decreased paternity, empirical patterns are equivocal. Some studies have found the predicted decrease in male care with increased sperm competition, while even more studies report no effect of paternity or sperm competition on male care. Here, we report the first example, to our knowledge, of paternal care increasing with the risk and intensity of sperm competition, in the ocellated wrasse (Symphodus ocellatus). Theory also predicts that if paternal care varies and is important to female fitness, female choice among males and male indicators traits of expected paternal care should evolve. Despite a non-random distribution of mating success among nests, we found no evidence for female choice among parental males. Finally, we document the highest published levels of extra-pair paternity for a species with exclusive and obligate male care: genetic paternity analyses revealed cuckoldry at 100 per cent of nests and 28 per cent of all offspring were not sired by the male caring for them. While not predicted by any existing theory, these unexpected reproductive patterns become understandable if we consider how male and female mating and parental care interact simultaneously in this and probably many other species.     

Frass clearing by male pine engraver beetles (Ips pini; Scolytidae): paternal care or paternity assurance

Male parental care and paternity assurance are often associatedwith long-duration pair bonds. The mating system of the pineengraver beetle, Ips pini, includes an association between themale and female that persists for most of the prolonged oppositionperiod. The male beetles remove frass that arnmmlatn as thefemales lay their eggs in die phloem tissue of the host tree.Experiments and field observations were done to test possiblebenefits to males that stay in the galleries removing frasswhile die females are ovipositing. Two hypotheses were thatclearing frass (1) provides some form of care that results inmore offspring being produced and (2) is part of a paternityassurance mechanism. Male removal experiments in the field producedno evidence that male presence significantly influenced anyof five measures of offspring production. Laboratory experimentsin which virgin females were bred reciprocally to sterile andfertile males showed that, while there is no strong patternof last-male pr, last-male paternity does increase over time.Field observations revealed that female pine engravers oftencarry sperm from previous maringi when they solicit entry toa male's breeding gallery. The pattern of paternity and thefemale's sperm storage capacity suggest that males must maintainprolonged mating access to females in order to ensure high paternity.Hence, frass clearing is necessary to maximize paternity     

Male parental care, female reproductive success, and extrapair paternity

Birds differ considerably in the degree of male parental care,and it has been suggested that interspecific variation in extrapairpaternity is determined by the relative importance of benefitsto females from male parental care and good genes from extrapairsires. I estimated the relationship between extrapair paternityand the importance of male parental care for female reproductivesuccess mainly based on male removal studies, using a comparativeapproach. The reduction in female reproductive success causedby the absence of a male mate was positively correlated withthe male contribution to feeding offspring. The frequency ofextrapair paternity was negatively related to the reductionin female reproductive success caused by the absence of a mate.This was also the case when potentially confounding variablessuch as developmental mode of offspring and sexual dichromatismwere considered. A high frequency of extrapair paternity occursparticularly in bird species in which males play a minor rolein offspring provisioning and in which attractive males providerelatively little parental care. Bird species with frequentextrapair paternity thus appear to be those in which directfitness benefits from male care are small, females can readilycompensate for the absence of male care, and indirect fitnessbenefits from extrapair sires are important.     

Male reproductive investment and queen mating-frequency in fungus-growing ants

Sperm number and male accessory gland compounds are often importantdeterminants of male mating success but have been little studiedin social insects. This is because mating in social insectsis often difficult to manipulate experimentally, and first evidencefor an explicit influence of accessory gland secretions on malemating success in social insects was obtained only recently.Here we perform a comparative analysis of male sexual organsacross 11 species of attine fungus-growing ants, representingboth genera with single- and multiple-queen mating. We foundthat the general morphology of the male sexual organs was verysimilar across all species, but the relative sizes of the accessoryglands and the sperm-containing accessory testes vary significantlyacross species. Small testes and large accessory glands characterizespecies with singly mated queens, whereas the opposite is foundin species with multiply mated queens. However, in the socialparasite Acromyrmex insinuator, in which queens have secondarilyreverted to single mating, males have accessory gland characteristicsreminiscent of the lower attine ants, but without having significantlyreduced their investment in sperm production. We hypothesizethat the main function of accessory gland compounds in attineants is to monopolize male paternity in similar ways as knownfrom other social insects. This would imply that the evolutionof polyandry in the terminal clade of the fungus-growing ants(the leafcutter ants) has resulted in selection for decreasedinvestment by males in accessory gland secretions and increasedinvestment in sperm number, in response to sperm competitionfor sperm storage.     

The male's dilemma: Increased offspring production is more paternity to steal

Summary Large potential effects of male care on the number of offspring females successfully raise are not sufficient to select for caring males because of the pervasive importance of mating competition. Males face a version of the social dilemma, in which increased production increases the pay-off for theft. Models of the allocation of male effort partitioned between caring for babies and competing for paternity show that the optimal allocation to care is very low under a wide range of conditions. Like sex allocation where the alternatives are male versus female function or sons versus daughters, the pay-offs to one alternative are always strongly frequency dependent. Because that alternative (male function, sons, male mating effort) pays so well when rare, it cannot remain rare under most conditions. Here we consider the consequences of partitioning mating effort into mate guarding and all other forms of mating conflict. If a male gets all his partner's conceptions while guarding, gaining them at a constant rate, there are two possible regions of stability. The evolutionarily stable strategy (ESS) depends on a parameter scaling the decisiveness of (non-guarding) mating conflict. When marginal returns from conflict decrease with scale, almost all effort goes into guarding. When marginal returns increase, the ESS devotes all effort to mating. Even when the potential effect of care is large, male equilibrium strategies allocate little effort to it. We also report the results of computer simulations showing that care increases if gains from guarding saturate quickly, so that a male is assured of the paternity of most of his partner's offspring with little guarding, and consequently the pool of unguarded conceptions open to competion shrinks sharply. But even when the male's dilemma is very much reduced, it still substantially limits the allocation to care. The results of both computer simulations and mathematical analysis converge with other lines of evidence that mating has much stronger effects than parenting in shaping male strategies.     

Multiple paternity in reptiles: patterns and processes

The evolution of female promiscuity poses an intriguing problem as benefits of mating with multiple males often have to arise via indirect, genetic, effects. Studies on birds have documented that multiple paternity is common in natural populations but strong evidence for selection via female benefits is lacking. In an attempt to evaluate the evidence more broadly, we review studies of multiple paternity in natural populations of all major groups of nonavian reptiles. Multiple paternity has been documented in all species investigated so far and commonly exists in over 50% of clutches, with particularly high levels in snakes and lizards. Marine turtles and lizards with prolonged pair-bonding have relatively low levels of multiple paternity but levels are nevertheless higher than in many vertebrates with parental care. There is no evidence that high levels of polyandry are driven by direct benefits to females and the evidence that multiple paternity arises from indirect genetic benefits is weak. Instead, we argue that the most parsimonious explanation for patterns of multiple paternity is that it represents the combined effect of mate-encounter frequency and conflict over mating rates between males and females driven by large male benefits and relatively small female costs, with only weak selection via indirect benefits. A crucial step for researchers is to move from correlative approaches to experimental tests of assumptions and predictions of theory under natural settings, using a combination of molecular techniques and behavioural observations.     

No evidence for adjustment of sex allocation in relation to paternal ornamentation and paternity in barn swallows

Sex allocation theory predicts that parents should adjust investment in sons and daughters according to relative fitness of differently sexed offspring. In species with female preference for highly ornamented males, one advantage potentially accruing to parents from investing more in sons of the most ornamented males is that male offspring will inherit characters ensuring sexual attractiveness or high-quality genes, if ornaments honestly reveal male genetic quality. Furthermore, in species where extra-pair fertilizations occur, offspring sired by an extra-pair male are expected to more frequently be male than those of the legitimate male if the latter is of lower quality than the extra-pair male. We investigated adjustment of sex ratio of offspring in relation to ornamentation of the extra-pair and the social mate of females by direct manipulation of tails of male barn swallows Hirundo rustica . Molecular sexing of the offspring was performed using the W chromosome-linked avian chromo-helicase-DNA-binding protein (CHD) gene while paternity assessment was conducted by typing of hypervariable microsatellite loci. Extra-pair offspring sex ratio was not affected by ornamentation of their biological fathers relative to the experimental ornamentation of the parental male. Experimental ornamentation of the parental males did not affect the sex ratio of nestlings in their broods. Female barn swallows might be unable to bias offspring sex ratio at hatching according to the quality of the biological father. Alternatively, fitness benefits in terms of sexual attractiveness of sons might be balanced by the cost of compensating for little parental care provided by highly ornamented parental males, if sons are more costly to rear than daughters, or the advantage of producing more daughters, if males with large ornaments contribute differentially more to the viability of daughters than sons.     

Nest building, sexual selection and parental investment

Avian nest building has traditionally been viewed as resulting in natural selection advantages, but it is also been associated with courtship and pair formation. We hypothesize that nest-building activity could be used as a sexually selected display, allowing each sex to obtain reliable information on the condition of the other. In this paper, we test the ‘good parent’ process in a scenario where nest size is a sexually selected trait. Thus, individuals with more extreme displays (larger nests) might obtain benefits in terms of either parental investment or differential parental investment by the partner. We predicted that: (1) species in which both sexes contribute to nest building have larger nests than those in which the nest is built only by one sex, because both sexes are using the nest-building process as a signal of their quality; (2) species in which both sexes work together in the nest-building process invest more in reproduction, because each can assess the other more reliably than in species where only one sex participates in nest building; and (3) in light of the two preceding predictions, nest size should be positively related to investment in parental care. A comparative analysis of 76 passerine species confirmed that nest size, relative to the species' body size, is larger when both sexes build the nest and that species with a larger nest relative to their body size invest more in reproduction. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.