↓ Skip to main content

The role of aedeagus size and shape in failed mating interactions among recently diverged taxa in the Drosophila mojavensisspecies cluster

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Ecology and Evolution, December 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The role of aedeagus size and shape in failed mating interactions among recently diverged taxa in the Drosophila mojavensisspecies cluster
Published in
BMC Ecology and Evolution, December 2014
DOI 10.1186/s12862-014-0255-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maxi Polihronakis Richmond

Abstract

BackgroundInvestigating the evolution of species-specific insect genitalia is central to understanding how morphological diversification contributes to reproductive isolation and lineage divergence. While many studies evoke some form of sexual selection to explain genitalia diversity, the basis of selection and the mechanism of heterospecific mate exclusion remains vague. I conducted reciprocal mate pair trials in the Drosophila mojavensis species cluster to quantify the frequency of failed insemination attempts, historically referred to as pseudocopulation, between lineages with discrete size and shape differences of the male aedeagus.ResultsIn cross-taxon matings aedeagus size had a significant effect on pseudocopulation frequencies, while aedeagus shape and genetic distance did not. The direction of the size difference was an important factor for successful mating. When females were mated to a cross-taxon male with a larger aedeagus than males from her own species, the pair could not establish a successful mating interaction. Females mated to cross-taxon males with a smaller aedeagus than conspecific males were able to establish the mating interaction but had issues disengaging at the end of the interaction.ConclusionsThe results of this study support a role for aedeagus size in the male-female mating interaction, with a secondary role for aedeagus shape. In natural populations, mating failure based on aedeagus size could serve as an important reproductive isolating mechanism resulting in failed insemination attempts after both the male and female show a willingness to mate.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 4%
Cuba 1 4%
Unknown 24 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 23%
Researcher 5 19%
Student > Bachelor 4 15%
Other 2 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 5 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18 69%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 12%
Computer Science 1 4%
Unknown 4 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 December 2014.
All research outputs
#16,721,208
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#2,818
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#216,025
of 368,288 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#50
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,714 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 368,288 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.