Data

Data from: Sexual ornaments but not weapons trade off against testes size in primates

The University of Western Australia
Lüpold, Stefan ; Simmons, Leigh W. ; Grueter, Cyril C.
Viewed: [[ro.stat.viewed]] Cited: [[ro.stat.cited]] Accessed: [[ro.stat.accessed]]
ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Adc&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2FANDS&rft_id=info:doi10.5061/dryad.qk514d2&rft.title=Data from: Sexual ornaments but not weapons trade off against testes size in primates&rft.identifier=10.5061/dryad.qk514d2&rft.publisher=DRYAD&rft.description=Males must partition their limited reproductive investments between traits that promote access to females (sexual ornaments and weapons) and traits that enhance fertilization success, such as testes and ejaculates. Recent studies show that if the most weaponized males can monopolize access to females through contest competition, thereby reducing the risk of sperm competition, they tend to invest less in sperm production. However, how males invest in sexual ornaments relative to sperm production remains less clear. If male ornaments serve as badges of status, with high-ranking males attaining near-exclusive access to females, similar to monopolizing females through combat, their expression should also covary negatively with investment in post-mating traits. In a comparative study across primates, which exhibit considerable diversification in sexual ornamentation, male weaponry and testes size, we found relative testes size to decrease with sexual ornaments but increase with canine size. These contrasting evolutionary trajectories might be driven by differential selection, functional constraints or temporal patterns of metabolic investment between the different types of sexual traits. Importantly, however, our results indicate that the theory of relative investments between weapons and testes in the context of monopolizing females can extend to male ornaments.&rft.creator=Lüpold, Stefan &rft.creator=Simmons, Leigh W. &rft.creator=Grueter, Cyril C. &rft.date=2019&rft.relation=http://research-repository.uwa.edu.au/en/publications/d4bb4864-1a97-4975-91b5-e78c636067b4&rft_subject=Sexual weapons&rft_subject=testes&rft_subject=Primates&rft_subject=Sexual ornaments&rft.type=dataset&rft.language=English Access the data

Access:

Open

Full description

Males must partition their limited reproductive investments between traits that promote access to females (sexual ornaments and weapons) and traits that enhance fertilization success, such as testes and ejaculates. Recent studies show that if the most weaponized males can monopolize access to females through contest competition, thereby reducing the risk of sperm competition, they tend to invest less in sperm production. However, how males invest in sexual ornaments relative to sperm production remains less clear. If male ornaments serve as badges of status, with high-ranking males attaining near-exclusive access to females, similar to monopolizing females through combat, their expression should also covary negatively with investment in post-mating traits. In a comparative study across primates, which exhibit considerable diversification in sexual ornamentation, male weaponry and testes size, we found relative testes size to decrease with sexual ornaments but increase with canine size. These contrasting evolutionary trajectories might be driven by differential selection, functional constraints or temporal patterns of metabolic investment between the different types of sexual traits. Importantly, however, our results indicate that the theory of relative investments between weapons and testes in the context of monopolizing females can extend to male ornaments.

Notes

External Organisations
University of Zurich
Associated Persons
Stefan Lüpold (Creator)

Issued: 2019-03-29

This dataset is part of a larger collection

Click to explore relationships graph
Subjects

User Contributed Tags    

Login to tag this record with meaningful keywords to make it easier to discover

Identifiers