Copulatory behaviour of the bank vole Myodes glareolus: matings with one and two males do not make a difference

• Autorzy: Borkowska A.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

In promiscuous species in which females mate with more than one male during oestrus, males may increase their sperm expenditure or change their copulatory behaviour in response to the risk of sperm competition. I used an experimental approach to investigate the pattern of copulatory behaviour of the bank voleMyodes glareolus Schreber, 1780 depending on whether the female mated with one or two males. The work showed that the copulatory period of the bank vole lasted about 80 minutes and consisted of 4–5 ejaculatory series, with multiple intromissions preceding ejaculation. There were no significant changes in number of intromissions across the first four ejaculatory series, but I did find a relationship between number of intromissions and first ejaculation latency; also, ejaculation latencies grew shorter as the ejaculatory series proceeded. Litter size did not differ significantly between females that mated with one male and those mating with two, nor did the reproductive success of males that mated with the same female. Mating with an oestrus female appears to be advantageous for bank vole males even if they mate as the second one, and the risk of sperm competition did not trigger changes in male copulatory behaviour. The similar durations of the copulatory period and patterns of change of ejaculation latencies during copulations with one and two males point to the role of the female in temporal copulatory behaviour of the bank vole.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

copulatory period; Myodes glareolus; allozyme; bank vole; copulatory behaviour; male; multiple mating; risk; rodent; sperm competition

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Acta Theriologica
• Rocznik: 2010
• Tom: 55
• Numer: 4
• Opis fizyczny: p.343-349,fig.,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Borkowska A.

• Institute of Biology, University of Bialystok, Swierkowa 20B, 15-950 Bialystok, Poland

Bibliografia

• Adler N. T., Resko J. A. and Goy R. W. 1970. The effect of copulatory behaviour on hormonal change in the female rat prior to implantation. Physiology and Behavior 5: 1003–1007. doi: 10.1016/0031-9384(70)90155-1
• Berteaux D., Bêty J., Rengifo E. and Bergeron J.-M. 1999. Multiple paternity in meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus): investigating the role of the female. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 45: 283–291. doi: 10. 1007/s002650050563
• Birkhead T. R. and Møller A. P. 1998. Sperm competition and sexual selection. Academic Press, San Diego: 1–826.
• Borkowska A., Borowski Z. and Krysiuk K. 2009. Multiple paternity in free-living root voles. Behavioural Processes 82: 211–213. doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2009.05.003
• delBarco-Trillo J. and Ferkin M. H. 2004. Male mammals respond to a risk of sperm competition conveyed by odours of conspecific males. Nature 431: 446–449. doi: 10.1038/ nature02845
• delBarco-Trillo J. and Ferkin M. H. 2007. Risk of sperm competition does not influence copulatory behavior in the promiscuous meadow vole (Microtus pennsylvanicus). Journal of Ethology 25: 139–145. doi: 10.1007/ s10164-006-0008-x
• Dewsbury D. A. 1972. Patterns of copulatory behaviour in male mammals. Quarterly Review of Biology 47: 1–33. doi: 10.1086/407097
• Elgar M. A., Champion de Crespigny F. E. and Ramamurthy S. 2003. Male copulatory behaviour and the risk of sperm competition. Animal Behaviour 66: 211–216. doi: 10.1006/anbe.2003.2189
• Erskine M. S. 1989. Solicitation behavior in the estrous female rat: a review. Hormones and Behavior 23: 473–502. doi: 10.1016/0018-506X(89)90037-8
• Ginsberg J. R. and Rubenstein D. I. 1990. Sperm competition and variation in zebra mating behaviour. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 26: 427–434. doi: 10.1007/ BF00170901
• Hoogland J. 1998. Why do female Gunnison’s prairie dogs copulate with more than one male? Animal Behaviour 55: 351–359. doi: 10.1006/anbe.1997.0575
• Horne T. J. and Ylönen H. 1996. Female bank voles (Clethrionomys glareolus) prefer dominant males; but what if there is no choice? Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 38: 401–405. doi: 10.1007/s002650050257
• Huck U. W., Tonias B. A. and Lisk R. D. 1989. The effectiveness of competitive male inseminations in golden hamster,Mesocricetus auratus, depends on an interaction of mating order, time delay between males, and the time of mating relative to ovulation. Animal Behaviour 37: 674–680. doi: 10.1016/0003-3472(89)90046-8
• Hunter F. M., Petrie M., Otronen M., Birkhead T. R. and Møller A. P. 1993. Why females copulate repeatedly with one male? Trends in Ecology and Evolution 8: 21–26. doi: 10.1016/0169-5347(93)90126-A
• Ims R. A. 1987. Male spacing systems in Microtine rodents. The American Naturalist 130: 475–484. doi: 10.1086/ 284725
• Jennions M. D. and Petrie M. 2000. Why do females mate multiply? A review of the genetic benefits. Biological Reviews 75: 21–64. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-185X.1999.tb00040.x
• Klemme I., Eccard J. A. and Ylönen H. 2007. Why do female bank voles,Clethrionomys glareolus, mate multiply? Animal Behaviour 73: 623–628. doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav. 2006.07.010
• Kozakiewicz M., Chołuj A. and Kozakiewicz A. 2007. Longdistance movements of individuals in a free-living bank vole population: an important element of male breeding strategy. Acta Theriologica 52: 339–348.
• Kozakiewicz M., Chołuj A., Kozakiewicz A. and Sokół M. 2009. Familiarity and female choice in the bank vole — do females prefer strangers? Acta Theriologica 54: 157–164.
• Kraaijeveld-Smit F. J. L., Ward S. J., Temple-Smith P. D. and Peatkau D. 2002. Factors influencing paternity success inAntechinus agilis: last-male sperm precedence, timing of mating and genetic compatibility. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 15: 100–107. doi: 10.1046/j.1420-9101.2002.00367.x
• Kruczek M. 1997. Male rank and female choice in the bank vole,Clethrionomys glareolus. Behavioural Processes 40: 171–176. doi: 10.1016/S0376-6357(97)00785-7
• Matthews M. and Adler N. T. 1977. Facilitative and inhibitory influences of reproductive behaviour on sperm transport in rats. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology 91: 727–741. doi: 10.1037/h0077364
• Milligan S. R. 1979. The copulatory pattern of the bank vole (Clethrionomys glareolus) and speculation on the role of penile spines. Journal of Zoology 188: 279–283. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7998.1979.tb03405.x
• Parker G. A. 1990. Sperm competition games: sneaks and extra-pair copulations. Proceedings of the Royal Society London B 242: 127–133. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1990.0115
• Ratkiewicz M. and Borkowska A. 2000. Multiple paternity in the bank vole (Clethrionomys glareolus): field and experiment data. Mammalian Biology 65: 6–14.
• Solomon N. G., Keane B., Knoch L. R. and Hogan P. J. 2004. Multiple paternity in socially monogamous prairie voles (Microtus ochrogaster). Canadian Journal of Zoology 82: 1667–1671. doi: 10.1139/z04-142
• Stockley P. and Preston B. T. 2004. Sperm competition and diversity in rodent copulatory behaviour. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 17: 1048–1057. doi: 10.1111/j. 1420-9101.2004.00742.x
• Toner J. P., Attas A. I. and Adler N. T. 1987. Transcervical sperm transport in the rat: the roles pre-ejaculatory behaviour and copulatory plug fit. Physiology and Behavior 39: 371–375. doi: 10.1016/0031-9384(87)90237-X