Abstract

According to classical parental care theory males are expected to provide less parental care when offspring in a brood are less likely to be their own, but empirical evidence in support of this relationship is equivocal. Recent work predicts that social interactions between the sexes can modify co-evolution between traits involved in mating and parental care as a result of costs associated with these social interactions (i.e. sexual conflict). In burying beetles (Nicrophorus vespilloides), we use artificial selection on a paternity assurance trait, and crosses within and between selection lines, to show that selection acting on females, not males, can drive the co-evolution of paternity assurance traits and parental care. Males do not care more in response to selection on mating rate. Instead, patterns of parental care change as an indirect response to costs of mating for females.

Highlights

  • Promiscuity and parenting are inextricably linked (Trivers 1972; Sheldon 2002; Alonzo 2010)

  • Counter-intuitive, the relationship between the probability of paternity and paternal effort in the current reproductive attempt may be negative rather than positive (Queller 1997; Houston & McNamara 2002; Kokko & Jennions 2008). Understanding why this might be so requires examining more than just correlations between parentage and parental effort – it requires accounting for the effects of social interactions between the sexes on the co-evolutionary relationship between traits involved with mating and those involved in parental care (Alonzo 2010)

  • Our results show that parental care evolves in response to selection on paternity assurance behaviour in N. vespilloides: that female parental care decreases in lines selected for higher repeated mating rate

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Promiscuity and parenting are inextricably linked (Trivers 1972; Sheldon 2002; Alonzo 2010). Counter-intuitive, the relationship between the probability of paternity and paternal effort in the current reproductive attempt may be negative rather than positive (Queller 1997; Houston & McNamara 2002; Kokko & Jennions 2008). Understanding why this might be so requires examining more than just correlations between parentage and parental effort – it requires accounting for the effects of social interactions between the sexes on the co-evolutionary relationship between traits involved with mating and those involved in parental care (Alonzo 2010)

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call