Despite reproductive interference, the net outcome of reproductive interactions among spider mite species is not necessarily costly

Salomé H. Clemente, Inês Santos, Rita Ponce, Leonor R. Rodrigues, Susana A. M. Varela*, Sara Magalhães

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

13 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Reproductive interference is considered a strong ecological force, potentially leading to species exclusion. This supposes that the net effect of reproductive interactions is strongly negative for one, or both, of the species involved. Testing this requires a comprehensive analysis of interspecific reproductive interactions, accounting for the order and timing of mating events, and for their effects on either fertility or fecundity. To this aim, we measured reproductive interactions among spider mites, using a focal species, Tetranychus urticae, and an invasive (T. evansi) and a resident (T. ludeni) species, varying the mating sequence and interval, and measuring the effect of such crosses on fecundity and offspring sex ratio (a measure of fertility, as these species are haplodiploid). We found that mating with heterospecifics affected fecundity and sex ratio negatively or positively, depending on the species involved, and on the order and timing of mating events. Overall, the net effect of reproductive interactions was weak despite strong effects of particular events. In natural situations, the outcome of reproductive interactions will thus hinge upon the frequency of each event.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)321-327
Number of pages7
JournalBehavioral Ecology
Volume29
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 14 Mar 2018
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Biological invasions
  • Mating
  • Reproductive interactions
  • Sperm precedence
  • Tetranychus

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Despite reproductive interference, the net outcome of reproductive interactions among spider mite species is not necessarily costly'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this