No abstract

No abstract

Female multiple mating (or polyandry) is considered to act as a genetic bet‐hedging mechanism, by which females can reduce the assessment error in regard to mates’ genetic quality when only uncertain information is available. In spite of frequent verbal arguments, no theoretical examination has been carried out to determine the effectiveness of bet‐hedging by multiple mating. In the present paper, I show that three factors, female population size, remating costs and environmental fluctuation, all affect the effectiveness of bet‐hedging. A mathematical model predicts that bet‐hedging effectively works only in small populations, and computer simulations were used to confirm this prediction. The results of simulations differed according to the degree of environmental fluctuation. In relatively stable environments, if there is no remating cost, the fixation probability of a multiple mating strategy is slightly higher than that of a single mating strategy, independent of female population size. However, with very slight fitness costs, multiple mating drastically loses its advantage as population size increases, and almost always becomes extinct within large populations. This means that the evolution of polyandry solely by the mechanism of bet‐hedging is unlikely in stable environments. However, in unpredictable environments, or when negative frequency‐dependent selection on fitness‐related loci is introduced, a multiple mating strategy is sometimes successful against a single mating strategy, even if it entails a small fitness cost. Therefore, female multiple mating may possibly evolve only in these limited conditions. In most cases, some deterministic mechanisms such as postcopulatory sperm selection by multiply mated females (or direct ‘material’ benefits) are more reasonable as the evolutionary causes of polyandry.

Polyandry (female multiple mating) has profound evolutionary and ecological implications. Despite considerable work devoted to understanding why females mate multiply, we currently lack convincing empirical evidence to explain the adaptive value of polyandry. Here, we provide a direct test of the controversial idea that bet-hedging functions as a risk-spreading strategy that yields multi-generational fitness benefits to polyandrous females. Unfortunately, testing this hypothesis is far from trivial, and the empirical comparison of the across-generations fitness payoffs of a polyandrous (bet hedger) versus a monandrous (non-bet hedger) strategy has never been accomplished because of numerous experimental constraints presented by most 'model' species. In this study, we take advantage of the extraordinary tractability and versatility of a marine broadcast spawning invertebrate to overcome these challenges. We are able to simulate multi-generational (geometric mean) fitness among individual females assigned simultaneously to a polyandrous and monandrous mating strategy. Our approaches, which separate and account for the effects of sexual selection and pure bet-hedging scenarios, reveal that bet-hedging, in addition to sexual selection, can enhance evolutionary fitness in multiply mated females. In addition to offering a tractable experimental approach for addressing bet-hedging theory, our study provides key insights into the evolutionary ecology of sexual interactions.

Females that mate with multiple males (polyandry) may reduce the risk that their eggs are fertilized by a single unsuitable male. About 25 years ago it was hypothesized that bet-hedging could function as a mechanism favoring the evolution of polyandry, but this idea is controversial because theory indicates that bet-hedging via polyandry can compensate the costs of mating only in small populations. Nevertheless, populations are often spatially structured, and even in the absence of spatial structure, mate-choice opportunity can be limited to a few potential partners. We examined the effectiveness of bet-hedging in such situations with simulations carried out under two scenarios: (1) intrinsic male quality, with offspring survival determined by male phenotype (male's ability to generate viable offspring), and (2) genetic incompatibility (offspring fitness determined nonadditively by parental genotypes). We find higher fixation probabilities for a polyandrous strategy compared to a monandrous strategy if complete reproductive failure due to male effects or parental incompatibility is pervasive in the population. Our results also indicate that bet-hedging polyandry can delay the extinction of small demes. Our results underscore the potential for bet-hedging to provide benefits to polyandrous females and have valuable implications for conservation biology.