IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v20y2009i2p354-361.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do polyandrous pygmy grasshopper females obtain fitness benefits for their offspring?

Author

Listed:
  • Sofia Caesar
  • Anders Forsman

Abstract

Explanations for polyandry in insects invoke material and genetic benefits that enhance female fitness via the production of more viable or more variable offspring. Here we use the color polymorphic pygmy grasshopper, Tetrix subulata, to evaluate effects of male quality, mate color morph resemblance (a proxy for compatibility), and polyandry on offspring performance. We experimentally mated females with different numbers and color morph combinations of males and reared offspring under either sun-exposed or shaded conditions using a split-brood design. We find a significant male identity effect on egg hatchability, consistent with the hypothesis that males vary in paternal quality. Offspring viability posthatching varied in a complex manner with solar regime, mating treatment, and parental resemblance. The effects of parental color morph resemblance on offspring performance suggest a potential role of compatibility and offspring variability. Monandrous females produced more viable offspring than polyandrous females (under shaded conditions) and we suggest as a hypothesis that the expected positive influence of polyandry on offspring performance may have been outweighed by more intense competition and antagonistic interactions among half-siblings. That an effect of mating treatment was evident under shaded but not under sun-exposed conditions suggests that great care is called for when making inferences from studies that show negative results. Copyright 2009, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Sofia Caesar & Anders Forsman, 2009. "Do polyandrous pygmy grasshopper females obtain fitness benefits for their offspring?," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 20(2), pages 354-361.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:20:y:2009:i:2:p:354-361
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/arn153
    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:20:y:2009:i:2:p:354-361. 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.