Author
Abstract
Clonal populations in which, after switching to sexual reproduction, simultaneous hermaphrodites may coexist with variable proportions of hermaphrodites functioning only as male or female provide an opportunity to test sex ratio bias and sex investment within a simultaneous hermaphrodite, which are collectively referred to as the modular reproductive effect in this study. An individual-based model (IBM) was used to determine how sex investment and sex ratio bias affect the cnidarian Hydra circumcincta’s fitness. Its clone-mates represent a genet, and after switching to sexual reproduction, they can be simultaneous hermaphrodites, hermaphrodites functioning as females, or hermaphrodites functioning as males, depending on their body size. The results of the model indicated that under low competition among polyps to fertilize eggs, hermaphrodites functioning as females and those functioning as males coexist, with the numerical superiority of the latter being more successful than simultaneous hermaphroditism independently of male-biased allocation of sex functions. When mate competition increases, the coexistence of hermaphrodites functioning as females and those functioning as males with the fundamental sex ratio 1:1 and females able to change their investment in eggs is the most successful. When there is strong mate competition, simultaneous hermaphroditism with strongly female-biased allocation of sex functions is the optimal strategy, except in scenarios with constrained investment in eggs. In such scenarios, various strategies, observed in natural populations of hydras, become successful.
Suggested Citation
Kaliszewicz, Anita, 2019.
"Variations of hydra reproductive strategies arising from its modular structure. Two aspects of the modular reproductive effect,"
Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 393(C), pages 52-60.
Handle:
RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:393:y:2019:i:c:p:52-60
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2018.12.016
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to
for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:393:y:2019:i:c:p:52-60. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecological-modelling .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.