Current Biology, Vol. 13, 754–757, April 29, 2003, 2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. DOI 10.1016/S0960-9822(03)00282-3 Experimental Evidence for the Evolution of Numerous, Tiny Sperm via

Matthew J.G. Gage1,* and Edward H. Morrow2,3 these traits generate selection from sperm competition 1Centre for Ecology, Evolution and Conservation in males. We used a laboratory population of School of Biological Sciences bimaculatus in which divergent sperm length traits had University of East Anglia been successfully selected for across five generations Norwich NR47TJ [4]. Sperm size and number are male specific and are United Kingdom repeatable between spermatophores in G. bimaculatus; 2Uppsala University significant associations exist between first and second Evolutionary Biology Centre spermatophore sperm lengths (R ϭ 0.85, p Ͻ 0.001, n ϭ Department of Ecology 23) and sperm numbers (R ϭ 0.8, p Ͻ 0.001, n ϭ 24). Norbyva¨ gen 18 D The sperm competition experimental protocol briefly Uppsala 752 36 involved two adult (Ͼ10 days posteclosion), pre- Sweden screened virgin males (20 sperm measured/male from the first spermatophore) that were mated sequentially (in random order) with a virgin adult female from laboratory Summary stock. Spermatophore attachment duration was main- tained for 1 hr after each mating to ensure that the entire Sperm competition, when sperm from different males ejaculate had entered the female tract. Following the compete to fertilize a female’s ova [1], is a widespread second mating, females were housed singly and were and fundamental force in the evolution of animal repro- allowed to oviposit into damp cotton wool. Eggs were duction [2]. The earliest prediction of sperm competi- collected every 3 days and were incubated for 12 days, tion theory was that sperm competition selected for at which point egg development could be scored. The the evolution of numerous, tiny sperm, and that this “irradiated male” technique identified paternity (see [6]): force maintained anisogamy [3]. Here, we empirically one random male in each two-male competition re- test this prediction directly by using selective breeding ceived a sterilizing (but otherwise nonpathological) dose to generate controlled and independent variance in of ␥ radiation (7 krad from 385 rad/min for 18.2 min) sperm size and number traits in the Gryllus from a 134 Cs ␥ radiation source. By using concurrent bimaculatus. We find that sperm size and number are controls (n ϭ 26 matings) for effectiveness of the irradia- male specific and vary independently and significantly. tion treatment (which was overall 93% sterilizing) and We can therefore noninvasively screen individuals and changes in natural fertility (which declined predictably then run sperm competition experiments between over time), we calculated the effective fertilization prece- males that differ specifically in sperm size and number dence of one focal (ϭrandom) male in each competition traits. Paternity success across 77 two-male sperm (for more details, see [5, 7]) and corrected this prece- competitions (each running over 30-day oviposition dence over time within each 3-day oviposition segment. periods) shows that males producing both relatively Total effective sperm precedence was calculated by small sperm and relatively numerous sperm win com- averaging the precedence in each 3-day segment (thus petitions for fertilization. Decreased sperm size and enabling more refined calculations that control for increased sperm number both independently pre- changes over time). Three-day segments did not con- dicted sperm precedence. Our findings provide direct tribute to the mean total precedence if the female laid experimental support for the theory that sperm com- less than 10 eggs in that period. Overall, we scored an petition selects for maximal numbers of miniaturized average of 96 eggs for each female’s 3-day segment sperm [3]. However, our study does not explain why (n ϭ 486 segments, 77 females) and an average output of 605 eggs per female; thus, a total number of 46,597 1ف G. bimaculatus sperm length persists naturally at mm; we discuss possibilities for this sperm size main- eggs were scored across all 77 two-male sperm compe- tenance. tition experiments. The mean total fertilization prece- dence of focal males was 0.486 (n ϭ 77), and the mean Results and Discussion total standard error variance cross each competition was 0.0626 (Ϯ0.038 SE) (n ϭ 77 competitions; n ϭ 486 We used methods that have been previously published 3-day time segments to generate mean precedence). [4, 5], except that we screened fertilization precedence We used simultaneous-entry multiple regression to from each of 77 experimental females over 31 days of analyze the independent effects of relative sperm size oviposition, and each of the 154 competing males was and sperm number on fertilization precedence (fertiliza- individually screened for both sperm length and sperm tion precedence is the proportion [arcsine transformed] number (which can be conducted noninvasively). Gryllus of eggs fertilized by focal male). Sperm competition suc- bimaculatus is an ideal experimental model due to its cess was dependent on both relative sperm size and polyandrous mating pattern and female sperm storage; sperm number (F2,74 ϭ 6.57, p ϭ 0.002, multiple regres- sion): males producing smaller and more numerous *Correspondence: [email protected] sperm than their rivals achieved higher fertilization pre- 3 Present address: Biological Sciences, University of California, cedence. Furthermore, both sperm size and sperm num- Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, California 93106-9611. ber exerted independent effects on fertilization prece- Sperm Competition and Sperm Size and Number 755

competition success. Furthermore, we show that, as differences in sperm traits between competing males become more exaggerated, greater sperm competition success is achieved by those males producing smaller or more numerous gametes. Sperm size and sperm number were both independent predictors of fertilization precedence, since there was no interdependence of these traits within sperm competitions and significant relationships exist after partialing out the variance asso- ciated with either respective sperm trait. Our results, together with the demonstrations that egg size influ- ences zygote fitness (e.g., [8]), provide a supportive framework for the evolution and maintenance of anisog- amy via disruptive selection in “males” from gamete competition and in “females” from zygote survival [3]. In previous work on this system [5], we examined whether males from different sperm length selection lines showed correlated successes in sperm competi- Figure 1. Relative Sperm Length and Sperm Competition Success tions. We found no significant relationships between Partial correlation (controlling for covariance with sperm number) the male selection line and sperm competition success. showing a significant negative relationship (t ϭϪ2.13, p ϭ 0.037) between relative sperm length (␮m) and fertilization precedence. However, there were limitations to our conclusions from Fertilization precedence is the proportion of eggs fertilized by one this work. First, the study was correlational, since we (random) focal male in each of 77 two-male sperm competitions; did not measure the actual sperm length of individual relative sperm length is the degree of difference (␮m) between the males in each competition, but defined sperm size ac- sperm length of the focal male and his competitors. cording to a male’s breeding line. Second, we did not have concurrent information on sperm number in sperm dence: sperm size: t ϭϪ2.13, p ϭ 0.037, n ϭ 77 competitions. And, third, we examined sperm competi- competitions; sperm number: t ϭ 2.63, p ϭ 0.01, n ϭ 77 tion success over only a 12-day oviposition period. In competitions. We found no evidence for a relationship this new study, we conduct two-male sperm competi- between sperm size and sperm number across our total tions with greater and more precise experimental power. male dataset (R ϭ 0.13, p ϭ 0.092, n ϭ 169 males). First, we screened every individual male for both sperm Our results therefore provide direct experimental evi- length and number traits. Second, these gamete traits dence that sperm competition success is dependent on are male specific and are repeatable between spermato- the production of both numerous and/or tiny spermato- phores (so that we can reliably define both males’ sperm zoa. Males producing ejaculates containing both rela- traits in each competition). And, third, we measured tively shorter sperm (Figure 1) and relatively higher num- sperm competition dynamics over a longer 31-day ovi- bers of sperm (Figure 2) achieved greater sperm position period. Relative sperm numbers have been documented as predictors of sperm competition success in experimen- tal studies exploring sperm competition mechanisms [9, 10]. Studies have also shown that mating pattern, and hence risk of sperm competition, is associated with rela- tive investment into spermatogenesis by using compar- ative (e.g., [11, 12]) and experimental [13, 14] ap- proaches. Studies examining the evolution of sperm size in relation to sperm competition produce mixed results. Two within-species studies on mites [15] and nema- todes [16] showed that males producing larger sperm achieved fertilization precedence; both species produce amoeboid sperm. Comparative studies across taxa do not provide any clear general pattern of a relationship between sperm competition and sperm size (e.g., in mammals, Gomendio and Roldan [17] find a positive relationship with polyandry, while Harcourt [18], Dixson [19], and Gage and Freckleton [20] find no relationship). It has been claimed that increasing flagellar length en- Figure 2. Relative Sperm Number and Sperm Competition Success ables greater swimming velocity [17] and/or increased Partial correlation (controlling for covariance with sperm length) flagellar power [21], and these gamete traits could be ϭ ϭ showing a significant positive relationship (t 2.63, p 0.01) be- selected for by certain mechanisms of sperm competi- tween relative sperm numbers and fertilization precedence. Fertil- tion (such as a “race” to fertilize). However, studies of ization precedence is the proportion of eggs fertilized by one (ran- dom) focal male in each of 77 two-male sperm competitions; relative natural variation in sperm length in externally fertilizing sperm number is the numerical difference between the focal male salmon (where sperm swimming behavior can be ob- and his competitor. served in a nonconfounded and natural swimming me- Current Biology 756

dium) found no evidence that longer flagella enabled Acknowledgments more rapid swimming velocities [22]. Comparative and experimental studies have therefore shown positive and This study was funded by the Natural Environmental Research Council and the Royal Society. We are very grateful to David Hosken, negative influences of sperm size and sperm number in Geoff Parker, Scott Pitnick, and Jo Ridley for very useful comments sperm competition. The results we present here are the and to Rebecca Shackleton for technical help. first to measure the independent influences of both sperm size and sperm number for sperm competition Received: January 15, 2003 success within one experimental system. Revised: February 27, 2003 The finding that shorter sperm are more competitive is Accepted: February 27, 2003 logically counterintuitive, since G. bimaculatus produce Published: April 29, 2003 relatively long sperm of about 1 mm in length, and other References studies have shown a larger-sperm advantage. If there is an independent advantage for smaller sperm, why is 1. Parker, G.A. (1970). Sperm competition and its evolutionary con- the evolved sperm size comparatively long? It is possi- sequences in the . Biol. Rev. 45, 525–567. ble that elongate sperm may be advantageous under 2. Birkhead, T.R., and Møller, A.P. (1998). Sperm Competition and different conditions of sperm competition that we did Sexual Selection (London: Academic Press). not replicate in our experiment (for example, under con- 3. Parker, G.A. (1982). Why are there so many tiny sperm? Sperm competition and the maintenance of two sexes. J. Theor. Biol. ditions of high density sperm storage if the female had 96, 281–294. mated with many different males). There is also the pos- 4. Morrow, E.H., and Gage, M.J.G. (2001). Artificial selection and sibility that elongate sperm advantages manifest them- heritability of sperm length in Gryllus bimaculatus. Heredity 87, selves later on through oviposition, although we did 356–362. sample across a relatively long 31 days of oviposition, 5. Morrow, E.H., and Gage, M.J.G. (2001). Sperm competition ex- when each female produced an average of 605 eggs. periments between lines of crickets producing different sperm lengths. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 268, 2281–2286. It is important to consider the interaction between 6. Boorman, E., and Parker, G.A. (1976). Sperm (ejaculate) compe- sperm size and the female tract. A recent experimental tition in Drosophila melanogaster, and the reproductive value study using Drosophila melanogaster showed that fe- of females to males in relation to female age and mating status. male tract dimensions (which were varied through selec- Ecol. Entomol. 1, 145–155. tive breeding) mediate the importance of sperm size in 7. Simmons, L.W. (1987). Sperm competition as a mechanism of sperm competition, with longer sperm achieving prece- female choice in the field cricket, Gryllus bimaculatus. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 21, 197–202. dence only when female tracts were experimentally 8. Einum, S., and Fleming, I.A. (2000). Highly fecund mothers sacri- lengthened [23]. The small-sperm size advantage in G. fice offspring survival to maximize fitness. Nature 405, 565–567. bimaculatus may be maintained if there are other size- 9. Martin, P.A., Reimers, T.J., Lodge, J.R., and Dzuik, P.J. (1974). associated factors that contribute to fertilization and/or The effect of ratios and numbers of spermatozoa mixed from reproductive success that are not directly associated two males on proportions of offspring. J. Reprod. Fertil. 39, with sperm competitiveness. It is possible that elongate 251–258. 10. Parker, G.A., Simmons, L.W., and Kirk, H. (1990). Analysing sperm are selected for fertilization efficiency that is sperm competition data: simple models for predicting mecha- independent of sperm competitiveness. For example, nisms. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 27, 55–65. smaller sperm may be more competitive at reaching the 11. Gage, M.J.G., Stockley, P., and Parker, G.A. (1995). Effects of egg vestment or micropyle but less efficient at fusing alternative male mating strategies on characteristics of sperm inside the ovum with the female pronucleus. The fertiliza- production in the Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar): theoretical and tion mechanisms in Drosophila species that produce empirical investigations. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B. Biol. Sci. 350, 391–399. giant sperm show a formally sequenced order of sperm 12. Gage, M.J.G. (1995). Continuous variation in reproductive strat- cell arrangement within the ova at fertilization [24], and egy as an adaptive response to population density in the moth components of this fertilization mechanism may give Plodia interpunctella. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 261, 25–30. advantages to sperm cell elongation [24]. A further pos- 13. Parker, G.A., Ball, M.A., Stockley, P., and Gage, M.J.G. (1997). sibility arises in that many invertebrate sperm contain Sperm competition games: a prospective analysis of risk as- two elongate mitochondrial derivatives that flank the sessment. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 264, 1793–1802. 14. Hosken, D.J., Garner, T.W.J., and Ward, P.I. (2001). Sexual con- central axoneme of the cell [25]. The functional signifi- flict selects for male and female reproductive characters. Curr. cance of these mitochondrial derivatives is not under- Biol. 11, 489–493. stood, but they run the length of the spermatozoon and 15. Radwan, J. (1996). Intraspecific variation in sperm competition often occupy the majority of the cell’s volume. Mitochon- success in the bulb mite: a role for sperm size. Proc. R. Soc. drial derivatives occupy 90% of the 38,000 ␮m3 sperm Lond. B Biol. Sci. 263, 855–859. volume in the water bug Notonecta glauca [26]. Mito- 16. LaMunyon, C., and Ward, S. (1998). Larger sperm outcompete smaller sperm in the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans. Proc. chondrial derivatives are biochemically inactive, al- R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 265, 1997–2002. though they are derived originally from the mitochondria 17. Gomendio, M., and Roldan, E.R.S. (1991). Sperm competition [27]. These derivatives may contain selfish mitochon- influences sperm size in mammals. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. drial genetic elements, separate from the normal male Sci. 243, 181–185. haplotype; the derivatives are absorbed in an ordered 18. Harcourt, A.H. (1991). Sperm competition and the evolution of manner into the zygote after fertilization [28]. Alterna- nonfertilizing sperm in mammals. Evolution 45, 314–328. 19. Dixson, A.F. (1998). Primate Sexuality: Comparative Studies of tively, the derivatives may represent male-derived con- the Prosimians, Monkeys, Apes, and Human Beings (Oxford: tributions to zygote development [29], such as costly Oxford University Press). proteins and/or deoxyribonucleotides for replication 20. Gage, M.J.G., and Freckleton, R.P. (2003). Relative testis size and embryogenesis. and sperm morphometry across mammals: no evidence for an Sperm Competition and Sperm Size and Number 757

association between sperm competition and sperm length. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 270, 625–632. 21. Katz, D.F., and Drobnis, E.Z. (1990). Analysis and interpretation of the forces generated by spermatozoa. In Fertilization in Mam- mals, B.D. Bavister, J. Cummins, and E.R.S. Roldan, eds. (Nor- well Massachusetts: Serono Symposia), pp. 125–137. 22. Gage, M.J.G., Macfarlane, C., Yeates, S., Shackleton, R., and Parker, G.A. (2003). Relationships between sperm morphometry and sperm motility in the Atlantic salmon. J. Fish Biol. 61, 1528– 1539. 23. Miller, G.T., and Pitnick, S. (2002). Sperm-female coevolution in Drosophila. Science 298, 1230–1233. 24. Karr, T.L., and Pitnick, S. (1996). The ins and outs of fertilization. Nature 379, 405–406. 25. Jamieson, B.G.M., Dallai, R., and Afzelius, B.A. (1999). Insects their spermatozoa and phylogeny (Enfield, NH: Science Pub- lishers). 26. Afzelius, B.A., Baccetti, B., and Dallai, R. (1976). The giant sper- matozoon of Notonecta. J. Submicr. Cytol. 8, 149–161. 27. Sivinski, J. (1984). Sperm in competition. In Sperm Competition and the Evolution of Animal Mating Systems, R.L. Smith, ed. (London: Academic Press), pp. 85–115. 28. Perotti, M.E. (1973). The mitochondrial derivative of the sperma- tozoon of Drosphila before and after fertilization. J. Ultrastruct. Res. 44, 813–818. 29. Afzelius, B.A. (1970). Thoughts on comparative spermatology. In Comparative Spermatology, B. Baccetti, ed. (New York: Aca- demic Press), pp. 565–571.