IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v19y2008i2p374-381.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Colorful male guppies do not provide females with fecundity benefits

Author

Listed:
  • Andrea Pilastro
  • Clelia Gasparini
  • Chiara Boschetto
  • Jonathan P. Evans

Abstract

The phenotype-linked fertility hypothesis (PLFH) predicts that males with elaborated sexual ornaments signal their high fertilizing efficiency to females and that female preferences for ornamented males are driven by direct fecundity benefits. Although some studies have demonstrated that attractive males produce more or higher quality sperm, there is limited experimental evidence that females derive fecundity benefits by mating with attractive males. Some of the best indirect evidence for the PLFH comes from work on guppies (Poecilia reticulata), an internally fertilizing species of freshwater fish in which phenotypically attractive males produce larger and relatively higher quality ejaculates than their less attractive counterparts. We used artificial insemination to impregnate female guppies using known numbers of sperm from a range of males with different phenotypes and related female fecundity (brood success, time from insemination to parturition, and brood size) to sperm numbers and male phenotype (body size and the relative area of color spots). We found no evidence that male phenotype or experimentally adjusted "ejaculate" size influenced any of our measures of female fecundity. These results highlight the importance of experimentally investigating potential fecundity benefits associated with female mating preferences before concluding that the maintenance of these preferences is driven by the pursuit of such benefits. Copyright 2008, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrea Pilastro & Clelia Gasparini & Chiara Boschetto & Jonathan P. Evans, 2008. "Colorful male guppies do not provide females with fecundity benefits," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 19(2), pages 374-381.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:19:y:2008:i:2:p:374-381
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/arm140
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:oup:beheco:v:19:y:2008:i:2:p:374-381. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/beheco .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.