Early‐life effects on body size in each sex interact to determine reproductive success in the burying beetle Nicrophorus vespilloides

Abstract

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Larval environmental conditions influence plasticity in resource use by adults in the burying beetle, Nicrophorus vespilloides

“… 2016 ; Bladon et al. 2020 ). Second, there is evidence in N. vespilloides that the quality of posthatching parental care varies with female body size, with larger females producing heavier larvae than smaller females (Steiger 2013 ).…”

Experimental evolution of a more restrained clutch size when filial cannibalism is prevented in burying beetlesNicrophorus vespilloides

“…Our results suggest that the evolution of an “optimistic” clutch size, and the overproduction of offspring, critically depends on a mechanism for killing surplus offspring (Forbes & Mock, 1998 ; Houston et al, 2012 ) rather than on uncertainty about prospects for reproductive success. In a No Care environment, where partial filial cannibalism after hatching was not possible, selection favored a reduction in clutch size on a smaller carcass because it resulted in the production of heavier larvae, each with greater future fitness prospects (Bladon et al, 2020 ). Consequently, after experimental evolution, No Care females laid fewer eggs when given a small mouse to breed upon than their counterparts in the Full Care populations, where partial filial cannibalism was still possible.…”

“…We estimated the strength of selection on clutch size in the absence of post‐hatching parental care in relation to two aspects of fitness: (i) the number of larvae at dispersal (i.e., brood size) and (ii) the average mass of each larva in the brood at dispersal (i.e., mean larval mass) because average larval mass at dispersal predicts future fecundity and survival in both males and females (Bladon et al, 2020 ). To estimate selection, we used part of the dataset collected on the Full Care populations in the experiments described in Duarte et al ( 2021 ) and focused only on generation 13.…”

“…(i) the number of larvae at dispersal (i.e., brood size) and (ii) the average mass of each larva in the brood at dispersal (i.e., mean larval mass) because average larval mass at dispersal predicts future fecundity and survival in both males and females (Bladon et al, 2020).…”

“…Partial filial cannibalism potentially increases the fitness of remaining offspring when resources are limiting (Bartlett, 1987 ; Schrader et al, 2015a ; Trumbo & Fernandez, 1995 ) because there is a marked trade‐off between brood size and larval size at dispersal in burying beetles. Eliminating some offspring thus promotes larval mass at dispersal, which is a strong predictor of future fitness (Bladon et al, 2020 ; Lock et al, 2004 ; Pascoal et al, 2018 ) while also providing an energetic benefit to parents.…”