Fertilization success suggests random pairing in frogs with regard to body size

Vallejos, Johana Goyes; Gomez, Johniah; Hernández-Figueroa, Abner D.; Vera, Rebecca; Green, David M.

doi:10.1007/s00265-021-03081-6

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, Agalychnis treefrogs and emerald glass frogs (Espadarana prosoblepon) lay their eggs in a single surface layer on leaves overhanging water. Leg movements used to spread the clutch into a single layer may facilitate fertilization despite size differences, a notion further supported by the fact that the majority of clutches observed in these studies had 100% fertilization success (Briggs, 2008;Goyes Vallejos, Gomez, Hernández-Figueroa, Vera, & Green, 2021). Males may also vary their behavior in a way that helps them adjust to variation in the size of their current mating partner.…”

Section: What Is the Role Of Size-assortative Mating In Facilitating ...mentioning

confidence: 83%

Random mating for body size despite fitness benefits of size‐assortative mating in a treefrog

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Size‐assortative mating in frogs and toads should increase fitness, because pairs consisting of partners well matched for size should also have a higher proportion of fertilized eggs. We examined whether the size ratios of mated males and females had an effect on fertilization success in Eastern Gray Treefrogs and tested whether the naturally observed size ratios could be attributed to female preferences or stochastic effects (male availability). We show that in this species, mating with a roughly size‐matched partner (m/f size ratios between 0.9 and 1.1) provides direct benefits by increasing fertilization success. Although the frequency of male advertisement calls would provide females with a cue by which to estimate the body size of a potential partner, the female call frequency preferences are not size‐dependent. Call frequency preferences are therefore unlikely to result in the choice of a well‐matched partner. The size distributions of males and females available at the breeding site appear to result in the distribution of male/female size ratios and the weak pattern of size‐assortative mating we observed in nature, despite apparently random mating with respect to body size.

show abstract

Section: What Is the Role Of Size-assortative Mating In Facilitating ...mentioning

confidence: 83%