1991
DOI: 10.1086/285199
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sperm Competition, Sperm Depletion, Paternal Care, and Relative Testis Size in Birds

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

5
194
0
1

Year Published

1994
1994
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 237 publications
(201 citation statements)
references
References 95 publications
5
194
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…So common is this view that many researchers, including the authors of this review (e.g. Fitzpatrick et al (2012aFitzpatrick et al ( , 2012bFitzpatrick et al ( , 2012c), commonly use relative testes size as a proxy measure for the strength of sperm competition in a given species, even in the absence of any information on a species mating behavior (Møller 1991, Briskie & Montgomerie 1992, Dunn et al 2001, Pitcher et al 2005, Calhim & Birkhead 2007). However, a degree of caution should be applied to accepting relative testes size as an absolute proxy for the level of sperm competition because testes can perform functions other than sperm production (Emerson 1997), and increased investment in testes mass could be favored in species where copulation occurs frequently (the male mating rate hypotheses) even in the absence of variation in the level of sperm competition (Crudgington et al 2009, Vahed & Parker 2012.…”
Section: Sperm: Solders In the Battle For Fertilizationmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…So common is this view that many researchers, including the authors of this review (e.g. Fitzpatrick et al (2012aFitzpatrick et al ( , 2012bFitzpatrick et al ( , 2012c), commonly use relative testes size as a proxy measure for the strength of sperm competition in a given species, even in the absence of any information on a species mating behavior (Møller 1991, Briskie & Montgomerie 1992, Dunn et al 2001, Pitcher et al 2005, Calhim & Birkhead 2007). However, a degree of caution should be applied to accepting relative testes size as an absolute proxy for the level of sperm competition because testes can perform functions other than sperm production (Emerson 1997), and increased investment in testes mass could be favored in species where copulation occurs frequently (the male mating rate hypotheses) even in the absence of variation in the level of sperm competition (Crudgington et al 2009, Vahed & Parker 2012.…”
Section: Sperm: Solders In the Battle For Fertilizationmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Both intraspecific and interspecific variation in avian testis size are positively related to parameters such as the number of testicular sperm (Lake 1971;Lofts and Murton 1973), the number of sperm per ejaculate (Parker et al 1942), ejaculate volume and sperm concentration (Møller 1988(Møller , 1991. In view of the almost completely reduced left testis and its few testicular tubules devoid of spermatogonia, we may reasonably conclude that the number of testicular sperm and the number of sperm per ejaculate have been reduced to about one half of that of a hypothetical ancestor still possessing two testes.…”
Section: Testis Reductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, a positive value in mating system bias means higher frequency of male social polygamy relative to the frequency of female polygamy,The proportion of broods containing extra‐pair offspring,Relative testes mass, calculated as log(testis mass) – 0.67*log(male mass), where 0.67 is the allometric exponent estimated by Møller (1991) from a large range of bird species,SSD, expressed as log(male mass) – log(female mass) when assuming an isometric relationship between male and female mass,The degree of dichromatism, calculated using the scoring system based on Owens and Hartley (1998), using the following rules. Each species was split into five main body regions (head; nape, back, and rump; throat, chest, and belly; tail; and wings), shortly referred to as head, back, belly, tail, and wings, respectively.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Relative testes mass, calculated as log(testis mass) – 0.67*log(male mass), where 0.67 is the allometric exponent estimated by Møller (1991) from a large range of bird species,…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%