| Title |
A father effect explains sex-ratio bias
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1098/rspb.2017.1159 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Aurelio F. Malo, Felipe Martinez-Pastor, Francisco Garcia-Gonzalez, Julián Garde, Jonathan D. Ballou, Robert C. Lacy |
| Abstract |
Sex ratio allocation has important fitness consequences, and theory predicts that parents should adjust offspring sex ratio in cases where the fitness returns of producing male and female offspring vary. The ability of fathers to bias offspring sex ratios has traditionally been dismissed given the expectation of an equal proportion of X- and Y-chromosome-bearing sperm (CBS) in ejaculates due to segregation of sex chromosomes at meiosis. This expectation has been recently refuted. Here we used Peromyscus leucopus to demonstrate that sex ratio is explained by an exclusive effect of the father, and suggest a likely mechanism by which male-driven sex-ratio bias is attained. We identified a male sperm morphological marker that is associated with the mechanism leading to sex ratio bias; differences among males in the sperm nucleus area (a proxy for the sex chromosome that the sperm contains) explain 22% variation in litter sex ratio. We further show the role played by the sperm nucleus area as a mediator in the relationship between individual genetic variation and sex-ratio bias. Fathers with high levels of genetic variation had ejaculates with a higher proportion of sperm with small nuclei area. This, in turn, led to siring a higher proportion of sons (25% increase in sons per 0.1 decrease in the inbreeding coefficient). Our results reveal a plausible mechanism underlying unexplored male-driven sex-ratio biases. We also discuss why this pattern of paternal bias can be adaptive. This research puts to rest the idea that father contribution to sex ratio variation should be disregarded in vertebrates, and will stimulate research on evolutionary constraints to sex ratios-for example, whether fathers and mothers have divergent, coinciding, or neutral sex allocation interests. Finally, these results offer a potential explanation for those intriguing cases in which there are sex ratio biases, such as in humans. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 54 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 20 | 37% |
| United States | 3 | 6% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 6% |
| France | 2 | 4% |
| Canada | 2 | 4% |
| Chile | 1 | 2% |
| Japan | 1 | 2% |
| Costa Rica | 1 | 2% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 18 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 36 | 67% |
| Scientists | 16 | 30% |
| Unknown | 2 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 65 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 21 | 32% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 8% |
| Lecturer | 4 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 9 | 14% |
| Unknown | 8 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 28 | 43% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 12% |
| Environmental Science | 6 | 9% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 2 | 3% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 6 | 9% |
| Unknown | 14 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 152. 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 20 July 2021.
All research outputs
#276,030
of 25,732,188 outputs
Outputs from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
#676
of 11,411 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,834
of 324,443 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
#17
of 173 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,732,188 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,411 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 40.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
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 324,443 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 173 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.