2006
DOI: 10.1590/s1519-69842006000400004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effect of local mate competition on fig wasp sex ratios

Abstract: In fig wasps, mating takes place among the offspring of one or a few foundress mothers inside the fig from which mated females disperse to found new broods. Under these conditions, related males will compete with each other for mating and several studies have shown female bias in brood sex ratios as a response to Local Mate Competition (LMC). Studying Pegoscapus tonduzi which pollinates Ficus citrifolia in Brazil, we analysed the effect of LMC (number of foundresses) on the sex ratio of the offspring of pollin… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
12
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
3
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Consequently the clutch size of each foundress decreased, as also noted by Moore et al (2005), Raja et al (in press) for L. tentacularis, and by Kathuria et al (1999) for Eupristina belagaumensis in india. Our results show that the sex ratio produced by a foundress becomes more female-biased as they oviposit more eggs, in agreement with Herre (1987), and that superparasitized syconia have a greater proportion of sons in their broods, as found by Molbo & Parker (1996) for N. vitripennis, and by Pereira & Prado (2006) for P. tonduzi. Thus the sex ratio adjustments between foundresses were apparently not caused by the number of males produced as also noted by Raja et al (in press), or by environmental predictability and mechanistic cues, as supported by West and Sheldon (2002) and West et al (2005).…”
Section: Total Males Females and Seeds Per Syconiumsupporting
confidence: 89%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Consequently the clutch size of each foundress decreased, as also noted by Moore et al (2005), Raja et al (in press) for L. tentacularis, and by Kathuria et al (1999) for Eupristina belagaumensis in india. Our results show that the sex ratio produced by a foundress becomes more female-biased as they oviposit more eggs, in agreement with Herre (1987), and that superparasitized syconia have a greater proportion of sons in their broods, as found by Molbo & Parker (1996) for N. vitripennis, and by Pereira & Prado (2006) for P. tonduzi. Thus the sex ratio adjustments between foundresses were apparently not caused by the number of males produced as also noted by Raja et al (in press), or by environmental predictability and mechanistic cues, as supported by West and Sheldon (2002) and West et al (2005).…”
Section: Total Males Females and Seeds Per Syconiumsupporting
confidence: 89%
“…The sex ratio (7.65) found for one foundress of P. silvestrii was similar to those reported for other fig wasps species (Grandi 1920, Condit 1947, Joseph 1958, Galil & Eisikowitch 1971, Hamilton 1979, West et al 1996, West & Herre 1998, Pereira & Prado 2006, Zavodna et al (2005 and not very different from that (8.7) reported by Werren (1980) for N. vitripennis (Pteromalidae). The sex ratio for P. tonduzi was 6.57, similar to the 6.9 reported in West et al (1997, Table 11).…”
Section: Males Per Foundress and Sex Allocationsupporting
confidence: 85%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Another explanation of sex ratio adjustment under LMC is foundress density affecting probability of ovipositing a son and that probability being independent of order. Foundresses may adjust their offspring sex ratios by the information of other foundresses or of oviposition in a patch left by other foundresses (Hamilton, 1967, 1979; Herre, 1985, 1987; Kinoshita et al , 2002; Moore et al , 2002; Pereira & Prado, 2006; Herre et al , 2008; Abe et al , 2009; Somjee et al , 2011).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It has been reported that pollinators can re‐emerge after pollination/oviposition (Grandi, 1920; Galil & Neeman, 1977; Gibernau et al , 1996; Herre, et al , 1996; Kinoshita et al , 1998; Pereira et al , 2000; Chen et al , 2001; Molbo et al ; 2003; Moore et al , 2003; Kjellberg et al , 2005; Pereira & Prado, 2006; Zavodna et al , 2007; Raja et al , 2008). Re‐emergence is prevalent and re‐emergence rates are different among figs in different fig subgenus', or between monoecious and functional dioecious figs (Moore et al , 2003).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%