Extra-pair paternity explains cooperation in a bird species

Lie to me to lay with me: Females deceive males via terminal investment

Historically, males have frequently been portrayed as the manipulative and deceptive gender, while females are often seen as adopting a coy and passive role. In this context, it is proposed that males use a terminal investment strategy, misleading females about their true poor condition, while females passively opt to mate with these deceptive males. However, we hypothesize that females in suboptimal condition may also engage in a terminal investment strategy by mimicking or enhancing their attractiveness to match that of females in better conditions. We studied this hypothesis in Tenebrio molitor, by subjecting females to three varying doses of lipopolysaccharides of Escherichia coli (LPS; 0.25, 0.5, or 1 mg ml-1), or three doses of the pro-oxidant Paraquat (PQ; 20, 40 or 80 mM), and subsequently assessing their survival and attractiveness to males. The LPS treatments and 20 mM of PQ had no significant effect on the survival or attractiveness of the females. However, females treated with 40 or 80 mM PQ survived fewer days compared to the control group. Those injected with 40 mM were more attractive than their control counterparts, while those treated with 80 mM were less attractive. Since the identical doses of LPS, which induce terminal investment in males, had no effect on females, we suggest sexual dimorphism in terminal investment. Furthermore, similar to males, if the stressor reaches a sufficiently high level, the signal becomes honest. These findings highlight how the quantity of stressors influences support for the terminal investment strategy in both males and females. Notably, this study challenges prevailing notions regarding gender roles in sexual selection, indicating that females, not just males, conceal their poor condition to attract mating partners.

From self-interest to cooperation: extra-pair mating as a driver of relaxed territorial aggression in social neighbourhoods

In socially monogamous bird species, males and females tailor their reproductive strategies to that of the other. Interactions are complex, and have elements of both conflict and cooperation. Breeding process is further complicated with the occurrence of matings outside the pair bond, which is a frequent phenomenon in these species. Extra-pair mating has clear benefits for males, but cuckolded males may withdraw care and resources at a cost to females, which produces an unbalanced costs-to-benefits ratios within the mating pair. We used an individual-based model with social networks approach, to study how female extra-pair mating strategies may affect male investment in offspring care and territorial defence. In our model, extra-pair copulation rate is a female-driven strategy; we use two adjustable male traits—care and territorial defence—that co-evolve with that strategy and control the number of extra-pair copulations initiated by a social female. The model utilises very simple rules of behaviours between individuals that lead to the emergence of evolved changes in mating strategies on a large scale. We show how extra-pair copulations initiated by females in their neighbourhood can reduce territorial defence and wasteful aggression between the males across the whole population. We propose that female mating behaviour and male responses are flexible traits that might serve as potential drivers of the evolution of cooperation.

Experimental extra-pair copulations provide proof of concept for fertility insurance in a socially monogamous bird

Extra-pair paternity is common among socially monogamous birds, but whether females benefit from having extra-pair copulations remains unresolved. In this study, I staged single extra-pair copulations in captive pairs of socially monogamous Japanese quail (Coturnix japonica) and used extra-pair males of a different colour to identify extra-pair fertilizations. This eliminated among-female variation in extra-pair copulations as a source of variation in extra-pair fertilizations and tested whether a single extra-pair copulation would insure against infertility of the social male. Overall, the probability of extra-pair fertilization was 0.46 for the first egg that was fertilized after extra-pair copulation, but this rapidly declined over consecutive eggs in the laying sequence. However, a single extra-pair copulation was effective in ensuring fertilization of the majority of a typical clutch in the few cases where the social male was completely infertile. Hence, my results show that variation in extra-pair paternity can be independent from variation in extra-pair copulation behaviour and that a single, strategically timed, extra-pair copulation can largely insure against social male infertility. Among-female variation in extra-pair fertilizations, and their declining probability over the laying sequence, as typical for many bird species, can thus, in principle, be parsimoniously explained by a uniform female fertility insurance strategy.