Spermatozoa represent the morphologically most diverse type of animal cells and show remarkable variation in size across and also within species. To understand the evolution of this diversity, it is important to reveal to what degree this variation is genetic or environmental in origin and whether this depends on species’ life histories. Here we applied quantitative genetic methods to a pedigreed multigenerational data set of the collared flycatcher Ficedula albicollis, a passerine bird with high levels of extra‐pair paternity, to partition genetic and environmental sources of phenotypic variation in sperm dimensions for the first time in a natural population. Narrow‐sense heritability (h2) of total sperm length amounted to 0.44 ± 0.14 SE, whereas the corresponding figure for evolvability (estimated as coefficient of additive genetic variation, CVa) was 0.02 ± 0.003 SE. We also found an increase in total sperm length within individual males between the arrival and nestling period. This seasonal variation may reflect constraints in the production of fully elongated spermatozoa shortly after arrival at the breeding grounds. There was no evidence of an effect of male age on sperm dimensions. In many previous studies on laboratory populations of several insect, mammal and avian species, heritabilities of sperm morphology were higher, whereas evolvabilities were similar. Explanations for the differences in heritability may include variation in the environment (laboratory vs. wild), intensity of sexual selection via sperm competition (high vs. low) and genetic architecture that involves unusual linkage disequilibrium coupled with overdominance in one of the studied species.

No abstract

Extra‐pair copulation is common among passerine birds. Females might engage in this behavior to obtain direct or indirect benefits. They may choose extra‐pair males with larger ornaments, especially if they are costly to produce. Here we studied extra‐pair paternity in the collared flycatcher. Genetic analysis allowed us to identify the presence or absence of extra‐pair young in the focal nests, and to identify extra‐pair fathers. We also identified potential males available as extra‐pair sires around the nests of females who had extra‐pair young. First, we tested the relationship between paternity in own nest and ornament size (wing patch and/or forehead patch), morphological traits and age of social males and females. Second, we compared the same suite of traits among social mates, extra‐pair males and all potential extra‐pair mates. Finally, we investigated the effect of the size of ornaments on the distance between the social nest and that of nest the extra‐pair father. Contrary to our prediction, males with larger ornaments and longer wings lost more paternity in their nests. We also found that early breeders lost less paternity in their nests. Extra‐pair males were older and had longer wings than social and potential extra‐pair males. Females mainly obtained extra‐pair mates near their nests but the distance did not vary according to ornamentation. These results could potentially be explained by differences in mate guarding strategy as older males may be more experienced in guarding their mate and attract other females more easily. More data about mate guarding and prospecting are needed to increase our understanding of mechanisms underlying the extra‐pair paternity in birds.

No abstract