Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c47g7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T03:34:55.873Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Differences in sperm storage and remating propensity between adult females of two morphotypes of the Anastrepha fraterculus (Diptera: Tephritidae) cryptic species complex

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 April 2014

S. Abraham ,
J. Rull ,
M. Mendoza ,
M.C. Liendo ,
F. Devescovi ,
A.K. Roriz ,
A. Kovaleski ,
D.F. Segura  and
M.T. Vera
S. Abraham*
Affiliation:
Laboratorio de Investigaciones Ecoetológicas de Moscas de la Fruta y sus Enemigos Naturales (LIEMEN), PROIMI, Tucumán, Argentina CONICET, Buenos Aires, Argentina
J. Rull
Affiliation:
Instituto de Ecología, A.C., Xalapa, Veracruz, Mexico
M. Mendoza
Affiliation:
Cátedra de Terapéutica Vegetal, Facultad de Agronomía y Zootecnia de la UNT, Tucumán, Argentina
M.C. Liendo
Affiliation:
CONICET, Buenos Aires, Argentina Instituto de Genética ‘E.A. Favret’, INTA Castelar, Buenos Aires, Argentina
F. Devescovi
Affiliation:
CONICET, Buenos Aires, Argentina Instituto de Genética ‘E.A. Favret’, INTA Castelar, Buenos Aires, Argentina
A.K. Roriz
Affiliation:
Universidade Federal da Bahia, Salvador Bahia, Brazil
A. Kovaleski
Affiliation:
Embrapa Uva e Vinho, Estação Experimental de Vacaria, Vacaria, Brazil
D.F. Segura
Affiliation:
CONICET, Buenos Aires, Argentina Instituto de Genética ‘E.A. Favret’, INTA Castelar, Buenos Aires, Argentina
M.T. Vera
Affiliation:
CONICET, Buenos Aires, Argentina Cátedra de Terapéutica Vegetal, Facultad de Agronomía y Zootecnia de la UNT, Tucumán, Argentina
*
*Author for correspondence Phone: (54-0381) 4344888 E-mail: solanaabraham@yahoo.com.ar
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The South American fruit fly, Anastrepha fraterculus, is a complex of cryptic species composed of at least seven morphotypes. Some of them, such as the Peruvian and Brazilian 1 morphotypes (which include Argentinean populations), exhibit strong pre-copulatory isolation, yet it is possible to obtain heterotypic crosses when forcing copulation of adults under laboratory conditions. The cross involving Peruvian males and Argentinean females produces F1 offspring with reduced viability in terms of egg hatch. This low hatchability could be caused by a reduced amount of sperm transferred to and stored by females mated with heterotypic males, which in turn could affect their post-copulatory behaviour. To test these hypotheses, we investigated sperm transfer and female mating and remating behaviour for homotypic and heterotypic crosses between adults of two morphotypes (Brazilian 1 [Argentina] and Peruvian [Peru]) of the A. fraterculus cryptic species complex. As reported before, Argentinean males and females mated earlier in the day than the other three mating combinations. Peruvian females engaged in shorter copulation times than Argentinean females. Peruvian females tended to store smaller quantities of sperm than Argentinean females, and almost a half of the crosses involving Argentinean males and Peruvian females were unsuccessful (no sperm transfer). However, there was no evidence that the cross between Peruvian males and Argentinean females resulted in storage of a critically small amount of sperm (posing risk of sperm shortage). Argentinean females were more willing to remate than Peruvian females, irrespective of male morphotype, but latency to remating was not affected by male or female morphotype. This study shows that mating behaviour differs between some of the A. fraterculus complex morphotypes, with female but not male morphotype determining female likelihood to remate.

Keywords

sexual isolationcryptic species complexremating behaviourSouth American fruit fly
Type
Research Paper
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 104 , Issue 3 , June 2014 , pp. 376 - 382
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abraham, S., Goane, L., Rull, J., Cladera, J., Willink, E. & Vera, M.T. (2011 a) Multiple mating in Anastrepha fraterculus females and its relationship with fecundity and fertility. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 141, 15–24.Google Scholar
Abraham, S., Goane, L., Cladera, J. & Vera, M.T. (2011 b) Effects of male nutrition on sperm storage and remating behavior in wild and laboratory Anastrepha fraterculus (Diptera: Tephritidae) females. Journal of Insect Physiology 57, 1501–1509.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Abraham, S., Liendo, M.C., Devescovi, F., Peralta, P.A., Yusef, V., Ruiz, J., Cladera, J., Vera, M.T. & Segura, D.F. (2013) Remating behaviour in Anastrepha fraterculus (Diptera: Tephritidae) females is affected by male juvenile hormone analogue treatment but not by male sterilization. Bulletin of Entomological Research 103, 310–317.Google Scholar
Abraham, S., Cladera, J., Goane, L. & Vera, M.T. (2012) Factors affecting Anastrepha fraterculus female receptivity modulation by accessory gland products. Journal of Insect Physiology 58, 1–6.Google Scholar
Attia, F.A. & Tregenza, T. (2004) Divergence revealed by population crosses in the red flour beetle Tribolium castaneum . Evolutionary Ecology Research 6, 927–935.Google Scholar
Cáceres, C., Segura, D.F., Vera, M.T., Wornoayporn, V., Cladera, J.L., Teal, P., Sapountzis, P., Bourtzis, K., Zacharopoulou, A. & Robinson, A.S. (2009) Incipient speciation revealed in Anastrepha fraterculus (Diptera: Tephritidae) by studies on mating compatibility, sex pheromones, hybridization and cytology. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 97, 152–165.Google Scholar
Eberhard, W.G. (1996) Female Control: Sexual Selection by Cryptic Female Choice. Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Elgar, M.A., Schneider, J.M. & Herberstein, M.E. (2000) Female control of paternity in the sexually cannibalistic spider Argiope keyserlingi . Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 267, 2439–2443.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grillet, M., Dartevelle, L. & Ferveur, J.F.A. (2006) Drosophila male pheromone affects female sexual receptivity. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 273, 315–323.Google Scholar
Harano, T. & Katsuki, M. (2012) Female seed beetles, Callosobruchus chinensis, remate more readily after mating with relatives. Animal Behaviour 83, 1007–1010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harano, T. & Miyatake, T. (2005). Heritable variation in polyandry in Callosobruchus chinensis . Animal Behaviour 70, 299–304.Google Scholar
Hernández-Ortiz, V., Gómez-Anaya, J.A., Sánchez, A., McPheron, B.A. & Aluja, M. (2004) Morphometric analysis of Mexican and South American populations of the Anastrepha fraterculus complex (Diptera: Tephritidae) and recognition of a distinct Mexican morphotype. Bulletin of Entomological Research 94, 487–499.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hernández-Ortiz, V., Bartolluci, A.F., Morales-Valle, P., Frías, D. & Selivon, D. (2012) Cryptic species of the Anastrepha fraterculus complex (Diptera: Tephritidae): a multivariate approach for the recognition of South American morphotypes. Annals of Entomological Society of America 105, 305–318.Google Scholar
Hurtado, J. & Hasson, E. (2013) Inter and intraspecific variation in female remating propensity in the cactophilic sibling species Drosophila buzzatii and D. koepferae . Journal of Insect Physiology 59, 569–576.Google Scholar
Joly, D. & Lachaise, D. (1993) Multiple mating frequency differs in two different geographic strains of Drosophila teissieri . Drosophila Information Service 72, 126–127.Google Scholar
Larson, E.L., Hume, G.L., Andres, J.A. & Harrison, J.A. (2012) Post-mating prezygotic barriers to gene exchange between hybridizing field crickets. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 25, 174–186.Google Scholar
Malavasi, A., Zucchi, R.A. & Sugayama, R. (2000) Biogeografia. pp. 93–98 in  Malavasi, A. & Zucchi, R.A. (Eds) Moscas-das frutas de Importância Econômica no Brasil. Conhecimento Básico e Aplicado, Riberão Preto, Brazil, Holos Editora.Google Scholar
Masta, S.E. & Maddison, W.P. (2002) Sexual selection driving diversification in jumping spiders. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 99, 4442–4447.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miyatake, T. & Matsumura, F. (2004) Intra-specific variation in female remating in Callosobruchus chinensis and C. maculatus . Journal of Insect Physiology 50, 403–408.Google Scholar
Nilsson, T., Fricke, C. & Arnqvist, G. (2002) Patterns of divergence in the effects of mating on female reproductive performance in flour beetles. Evolution 56, 111–120.Google ScholarPubMed
Nilsson, T., Fricke, C. & Arnqvist, G. (2003) The effects of male and female genotype on variance in male fertilization success in the red flour beetle (Tribolium castaneum). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 53, 227–233.Google Scholar
Norrbom, A.L. (2004) Host plant database for Anastrepha and Toxotripana (Diptera: Tephritidae: Toxotripanini). Available online at http://www.sel.barc.usda.gov/diptera/tephriti/tephriti.htm (accessed 3 December 2012).Google Scholar
Pai, A. & Bernasconi, G. (2008) Polyandry and female control: the red flour beetle Tribolium castaneum as a case study. Journal of Experimental Zoology (Molecular Development Evolution) , 310B, 148–159. doi: 10.1002/jez.b.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pérez-Staples, D. & Aluja, M. (2006) Sperm allocation and cost of mating in a tropical tephritid fruit fly. Journal of Insect Physiology 52, 839–845.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pérez-Staples, D., Weldon, C.W., Radhakrishnan, P., Prenter, J. & Taylor, P.W. (2010) Control of copula duration and sperm storage by female Queensland fruit flies. Journal of Insect Physiology 56, 1755–1762.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Petit-Marty, N., Vera, M.T., Calcagno, G., Cladera, J.L., Segura, D.F., Allinghi, A., Rodriguero, M., Gómez Cendra, P., Viscarret, M.M. & Vilardi, J.C. (2004) Sexual behavior and mating compatibility among four populations of Anastrepha fraterculus (Diptera: Tephritidae) from Argentina. Annals of Entomological Society of America 97, 1320–1327.Google Scholar
Price, C.S.C, Kim, C.H., Gronlund, C.J. & Coyne, J.A. (2001) Cryptic reproductive isolation in the Drosophila simulans species complex. Evolution 55, 81–92.Google Scholar
Rull, J., Abraham, S., Kovaleski, A., Segura, D.F., Mendoza, M., Liendo, M.C. & Vera, M.T. (2013) Evolution of prezygotic and postzygotic barriers to gene flow among three cryptic species within the Anastrepha fraterculus complex. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata, 148, 213–222. doi: 10.1111/eea.12094.Google Scholar
Salles, L.A.B. (1995) Bioecologia e Controle da Mosca-das Frutas Sul-Americanas. Pelotas, Brazil, EMBRAPA-CPACT.Google Scholar
Savalli, U.M. & Fox, C.F. (1998) Genetic variation in paternal investment in a seed beetle. Animal Behaviour 56, 953–961.Google Scholar
Selivon, D., Perondini, A.L.P. & Morgante, J.S. (1999) Haldane´s rule and other aspects of reproductive isolation observed in the Anastrepha fraterculus complex (Diptera: Tephritidae). Genetics and Molecular Biology 22, 507–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simmons, L.W. (2001) Sperm Competition and its Evolutionary Consequences in the Insects. Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Simmons, L.W. (2003) The evolution of polyandry: patterns of genotypic variation in female mating frequency, male fertilization success and a test of the sexy-sperm hypothesis. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 16, 624–634.Google Scholar
Singh, B.N. & Singh, S.R. (1999) Female remating in Drosophila ananassae: shorter duration of copulation during second mating as compared to first mating. Journal of Biosciences 24, 427–431.Google Scholar
Smith-Caldas, M.R.B., McPheron, B.A., Silva, J.G. & Zucchi, R.A. (2001) Phylogenetic relationships among species of the fraterculus group (Anastrepha: Diptera: Tephritidae) inferred from DNA sequences of mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase 1. Neotropical Entomology 30, 565–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steck, G.J. (1991) Biochemical systematics and population genetic structure of Anastrepha fraterculus and related species (Diptera: Tephritidae). Annals of Entomological Society of America 84, 10–28.Google Scholar
Steck, G.J. & Sheppard, W.S. (1993) Mitochondrial DNA variation in Anastrepha fraterculus . pp. 9–14 in Aluja, M. & Liedo, P. (Eds) Fruit Flies Biology and Management, New York, Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Stone, A. (1942) The fruit flies of the genus Anastrepha . US Department of Agriculture Miscellaneous Publications 439, 1–112.Google Scholar
Taylor, P.W., Kaspi, R. & Yuval, B. (2000) Copula duration and sperm storage in Mediterranean fruit flies from a wild population. Physiological Entomology 25, 94–99.Google Scholar
Torres-Vila, L.M., Rodríguez-Molina, M.C., Gragera, J. & Bielza-Lino, P. (2001) Polyandry in Lepidoptera: a heritable trait in Spodoptera exigua Hübner. Heredity 86, 177–183.Google Scholar
Torres-Vila, L.M., Gragera, J., Rodríguez-Molina, M.C. & Stockel, J. (2002) Heritable variation for female remating in Lobesia botrana, a usually monandrous moth. Animal Behaviour 64, 899–907.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Twig, E. & Yuval, B. (2005) Function of multiple sperm organs in females Mediterranean fruit flies (Ceratitis capitata, Diptera: Tephritidae). Journal of Insect Physiology 51, 67–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vera, M.T., Cáceres, C., Wornoayporn, V., Islam, A., Robinson, A.S., de la Vega, M.H., Hendrichs, J. & Cayol, J.P. (2006) Mating incompatibility among populations of the South American fruit fly Anastrepha fraterculus (Diptera: Tephritidae). Annals of Entomological Society of America 99, 387–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wedell, N. (2001) Female remating in butterflies: interaction between female genotype and nonfertile sperm. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 14, 746–754.Google Scholar