2006
DOI: 10.1093/beheco/arl076
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Testes size in birds: quality versus quantity—assumptions, errors, and estimates

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
70
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 72 publications
(72 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
2
70
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Testis mass was determined from wet weight of previously frozen tissue (n = 3) or from formalin preserved tissue (n = 5). Calhim and Birkhead (2007) showed that formalinfixed testes do not change in mass, hence these two different measures are comparable. All measures are given using the mean ± standard deviation.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…Testis mass was determined from wet weight of previously frozen tissue (n = 3) or from formalin preserved tissue (n = 5). Calhim and Birkhead (2007) showed that formalinfixed testes do not change in mass, hence these two different measures are comparable. All measures are given using the mean ± standard deviation.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…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%
“…Indeed, several comparative studies in birds have found that sperm are morphologically less variable in species where the level of sperm competition is greater (Calhim et al 2007, Immler et al 2008, Kleven et al 2008, Lü pold et al 2009b. These studies provide support for the notion that sperm morphology is under strong selection from sperm competition.…”
Section: Variation In Sperm Morphologymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Relative testis size, a commonly used proxy for sperm competition in avian studies [6,17], was estimated by including both (ln-transformed) testes mass and body mass as independent variables in statistical models. Data on testes mass and body mass were obtained from museum sources, from published literature [39] or from males collected (under licence) during the breeding season. Data on sperm length variation were calculated from sperm as the between-male coefficient of variation (CV bm ¼ s.d./mean  100), adjusted for small sample size according to the formula adjusted CV bm ¼ (1 þ 1/4n)  CV bm [40].…”
Section: (D) Index Of Sperm Competitionmentioning
confidence: 99%