Mating pattern, female reproduction and sexual size dimorphism in a narrow-mouthed frog (Microhyla fissipes)

in Animal Biology
Restricted Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?



Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.



Help

Have Institutional Access?



Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?



Connect

Abstract

The difference in body size and/or shape between males and females, called sexual size dimorphism, is widely accepted as the evolutionary consequence of the difference between reproductive roles. To study the mating pattern, female reproduction and sexual size dimorphism in a population of Microhyla fissipes, amplexus pairs were collected, and the snout-vent length of males and females, female reproductive traits and fertilization rate were measured. If the body size of amplexed females is larger than that of amplectant males, this is referred to as a female-larger pair, a phenomenon that was often observed for M. fissipes in this study. Interestingly, snout-vent length of males in male-larger pairs was greater than that in female-larger pairs, however the post-spawning body mass, clutch size, egg dry mass and clutch dry mass did not differ between both types of pairs. Snout-vent length of males was positively related to that of females in each amplexus pair. After accounting for the snout-vent lengths of females, we showed that snout-vent lengths of males in male-larger pairs were greater than those of females in female-larger pairs. The snout-vent length ratio of males and females was not related to fertilization rate in each amplexus pair. The mean fertilization rate was not different between both amplexus pairs. These results suggest that (1) M. fissipes displays female-biased sexual size dimorphism and has two amplexus types with size-assortative mating; (2) the snout-vent length ratio of males and females in each amplexus type was consistent with the inverse of Rensch’s rule, and was driven by the combined effect of sexual selection and fecundity selection; (3) females with a larger body size were preferred by males due to their higher fecundity, while the body size of males was not important for fertilization success.

Mating pattern, female reproduction and sexual size dimorphism in a narrow-mouthed frog (Microhyla fissipes)

in Animal Biology

Sections

References

AnderssonM. (1994) Sexual Selection. Princeton University PressPrinceton, NJ, USA.

ArakA. (1983) Male-male competition and mate choice in anuran amphibians. In: P. Bateson (Ed.) Mate Choice pp. 181-210. Cambridge University PressCambridge, UK.

BastosR.P. & HaddadC.F.B. (1996) Breeding activity of the Neotropical treefrog Hyla elegans (Anura, Hylidae). J. Herpetol.30355-360.

BellR.C. & ZamudioK.R. (2012) Sexual dichromatism in frogs: natural selection, sexual selection and unexpected diversity. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci.2794686-4693.

BöllS. & LinsenmairK.E. (1998) Size-dependent male reproductive success and size-assortative mating in the midwife toad Alytes obstetricans. Amphib. Reptil.1975-89.

BourneG.R. (1993) Proximate costs and benefits of mate acquisition at leks of the frog Ololygon rubra. Anim. Behav.451051-1059.

BuzattoB.A.ThyerE.M.RobertsJ.D. & SimmonsL.W. (2016) Sperm competition and the evolution of precopulatory weapons: testis size and amplexus position, but not arm strength, affect fertilization success in a chorusing frog. Evolution71329-341.

CaiM.Z. (2009) Microhylidae. In: L. FeiS.Q. HuC.Y. Ye & Y.Z. Huang (Eds) Fauna Sinica Amphibia vol. 2 (Anura) pp. 904-910. Science PressBeijing, China.

ChajmaP. & VojarJ. (2016) The effect of size-assortative mating on fertilization success of the common toad (Bufo bufo). Amphib. Reptil.37389-395.

CrespiB.J. (1989) Causes of assortative mating in arthropods. Anim. Behav.38980-1000.

DaviesN.B. & HallidayT.R. (1977) Optimal mate selection in the toad Bufo bufo. Nature26956-58.

De LisleS.P. & RoweL. (2013) Correlated evolution of allometry and sexual dimorphism across higher taxa. Am. Nat.182630-639.

DittrichC.RodríguezA.SegevO.DrakulićS.FeldhaarH.VencesM. & RödelM.O. (2018) Temporal migration patterns and mating tactics influence size-assortative mating in Rana temporaria. Behav. Ecol.29418-428.

FairbairnD.J. (1997) Allometry for sexual size dimorphism: pattern and process in the coevolution of body size in males and females. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst.28659-687.

FanX.L.LinZ.H. & JiX. (2013) Male size does not correlate with fertilization success in two bufonid toads that show size-assortative mating. Curr. Zool.59740-746.

FeiL.YeC.Y. & JiangJ.P. (2012) Colored Atlas of Chinese Amphibians and Their Distributions. Sichuan Science and Technology Publishing HouseChengdu, China.

GosnerK.L. (1960) A simplified table for staging anuran embryos and larvae with notes on identification. Herpetologica16183-190.

GramapurohitN.P. & RadderR.S. (2012) Mating pattern, spawning behavior, and sexual size dimorphism in the tropical toad Bufo melanostictus (Schn.). J. Herpetol.46412-416.

GreenD.M. (2015) Implications of female body-size variation for the reproductive ecology of an anuran amphibian. Ethol. Ecol. Evol.27173-184.

GutiérrezG. & LuddeckeH. (2002) Mating pattern and hatching success in a population of the Andean frog Hyla labialis. Amphib. Reptil.23281-292.

HallidayT.R. & TejedoM. (1995) Intrasexual selection and alternative mating behaviour. In: H. Heatwole & B.K. Sullivan (Eds) Amphibian Biology: Social Behaviour pp. 419-468. Surrey Beatty & SonsChipping Norton, UK.

HanX. & FuJ.Z. (2013) Does life history shape sexual size dimorphism in anurans? A comparative analysis. BMC Evol. Biol.1327. DOI:10.1186/1471-2148-13-27.

KrupaJ.J. (1988) Fertilization efficiency in the great plains toad Bufo cognatus. Copeia1988800-802.

KuramotoM. & JoshyS.H. (2006) Morphological and acoustic comparisons of Microhyla ornata, M. fissipes, and M. okinavensis (Anura: Microhylidae). Curr. Herpetol.2515-27.

LiaoW.B. & ChenW. (2012) Inverse Rensch’s rule in a frog with female-biased sexual size dimorphism. Naturwissenschaften99427-431.

LiaoW.B.ZengY.ZhouC.Q. & JehleR. (2013) Sexual size dimorphism in anurans fails to obey Rensch’s rule. Front. Zool.1010. DOI:10.1186/1742-9994-10-10.

LiaoW.B.LiuW.C. & MeriläJ. (2015) Andrew meets Rensch: sexual size dimorphism and the inverse of Rensch’s rule in Andrew’s toad (Bufo andrewsi). Oecologia177389-399.

LiuC.C. & HuS.Q. (1961) Chinese Tailless Amphibians. Science PressBeijing, China.

LiuW.Z. & LueS.Q. (1991) Microhylidae Guenther. In: D.T. Yang (Ed.) The Amphibian-Fauna of Yunnan pp. 224-247. China Forestry Publishing HouseBeijing, China.

LiuS.L.SongZ.M.ZhangJ.Z. & HeM.Y. (1996) Studies on early embryonic development in Microhyla ornata. J. Sichuan Univ. (Nat. Sci.)33323-329.

LouS.L.ZhaoL.LuD. & LiaoW.B. (2016) Mating patterns in three Bufo andrewsi populations at different latitude. Russ. J. Ecol.47514-518.

LuX.MaX.LiY. & FanL. (2009) Breeding behavior and mating system in relation to body size in Rana chensinensis, a temperate frog endemic to northern China. J. Ethol.27391-400.

LuD.ZhouC.Q. & LiaoW.B. (2014) Pattern of sexual size dimorphism supports the inverse Rensch’s rule in two frog species. Anim. Biol.6487-95.

MarcoA. & LizanaM. (2002) The absence of species and sex recognition during mate search by male common toads Bufo bufo. Ethol. Ecol. Evol.141-8.

MarcoA.KieseckerJ.M.ChiversD.P. & BlausteinA.R. (1998) Sex recognition and mate choice by male western toads, Bufo boreas. Anim. Behav.551631-1635.

McGarrityM. & JohnsonS. (2009) Geographic trend in sexual size dimorphism and body size of Osteopilus septentrionalis (Cuban treefrog): implications for invasion of the southeastern United States. Biol. Invasions111411-1420.

MonnetJ.M. & CherryM.I. (2002) Sexual size dimorphism in anurans. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci.2692301-2307.

NaliR.C.ZamudioK.R.HaddadC.F.B. & PradoC.P.A. (2014) Size-dependent selective mechanisms on males and females and the evolution of sexual size dimorphism in frogs. Am. Nat.184727-740.

OrenseM.M.D. & Tejedo-MadueñoM. (1990) Size-based mating pattern in the tree frog Hyla arborea. Herpetologica46176-182.

RobertsonJ.G.M. (1986) Female choice, male strategies and the role of vocalizations in the Australian frog Uperoleia rugosa. Anim. Behav.34773-784.

RobertsonJ.G.M. (1990) Female choice increases fertilization success in the Australian frog, Uperoleia laevigata. Anim. Behav.39639-645.

RudoyA. (2017) Evolution of sexual dimorphism and Rensch’s rule in the beetle genus Limnebius (Hydraenidae): is sexual selection opportunistic? PeerJ5e3060. DOI:10.7717/peerj.3060.

RyanM.J. (1980) Female mate choice in a Neotropical frog. Science209523-525.

ShineR. (1979) Sexual selection and sexual dimorphism in the Amphibia. Copeia1979297-306.

SzékelyT.FreckletonR.P. & ReynoldsJ.D. (2004) Sexual selection explains Rensch’s rule of size dimorphism in shorebirds. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA10112224-12227.

TaylorE.D. (1962) The amphibian fauna of Thailand. Univ. Kansas Sci. Bull.43265-599.

VojarJ.PušV.KopeckýO.ChajmaP. & ŠálekM. (2015) The effect of sex ratio on size-a ssortative mating in two explosively breeding anurans. Amphib. Reptil.36149-154.

WellsK.D. (2007) The Ecology and Behavior of Amphibians. University of Chicago PressChicago, IL, USA.

WoolbrightL.L. (1983) Sexual selection and size dimorphism in anuran Amphibia. Am. Nat.121110-119.

YuT.L.LiH.J. & LuX. (2013) Mating patterns of Rana kukunoris from three populations along an altitudinal gradient on the Tibetan Plateau. Anim. Biol.63131-138.

Figures

  • View in gallery

    Descriptive statistics, expressed as means ± 1 SE and range, for male snout-vent length (SVL), fertilization rate and female reproductive traits. Results of G-test (for number of amplexus pairs between male-larger pairs and female-larger pairs) and one-way ANOVAs (for SVL, fertilization rate and residuals of post-spawning body mass, clutch size, egg dry mass and clutch dry mass against female SVL) are given in the table. MLP: male-larger pairs, FLP: female-larger pairs.

  • View in gallery

    The relationship between the snout-vent lengths of amplectant male and female frogs in M. fissipes. All data were log10-transformed. Regression lines were adjusted for two pairs with a common slope (0.69) to facilitate comparisons. The dotted line represent the assuming slope = 1. Solid dots and the solid line represent male-larger pairs, open dots and the dashed line represent female-larger pairs.

  • View in gallery

    The relationship of post-spawning body mass (A), clutch size (B), egg dry mass (C), clutch dry mass (D) with female SVL in M. fissipes. Female SVLs were log10-transformed. Regression equations and coefficients are given in the figure. Solid dots represent male-larger pairs, open dots represent female-larger pairs.

Index Card

Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 27 27 27
Full Text Views 4 4 4
PDF Downloads 2 2 2
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0