Female mating failures in insects

Abstract

Empirical and experimental studies reporting the probability that some females remain unmated in field populations of insects (defined herein as mating failures) are reviewed in more than 100 species. The techniques used to quantify mating failures in the field are summarized, as well as factors that influence the probability that females mate during their lifetime. The existing empirical data provide partial support for hypotheses generated by theoretical models, although the trends observed in field populations are far more diverse and complex than predictions derived from ecological theory, e.g., the effect of population density on female mating success at small and large spatial scales is opposite. Mating success of females increases with the ratio of males in the population, but the relation between emergence time, sex ratio, and female mating success is variable. Females have evolved a broad range of physiological and behavioural adaptations to reduce mating failures, and exhibit a flexible context‐dependent response to constraints limiting mating success. The large number of studies in Lepidoptera suggests a higher mating success in butterflies than moths. Examples of high rates of mating failure include species with gynogenous reproduction, long range migration, pre‐reproductive maturation, male‐biased sex ratio, acquisition of resources essential for reproduction, and female flightlessness. Species with sessile females that mate and oviposit near their emergence site provide model systems to investigate the causes and demographic consequences of female mating failure.

Unmatedness Promotes the Evolution of Helping More in Diplodiploids than in Haplodiploids

“…A female can remain unmated if she is not able to find a mate e.g. due to low population density (Godfray 1990;Rhainds 2010;Morse 2013). If a female does mate but the mating does not result in fertilization (possible reasons reviewed by Godfray 1990), she may become effectively unmated as remating can be obstructed (reviewed by Godfray 1990;Ode et al 1997).…”

An equal sex ratio followed by differential sex mortality causes overestimation of females in gall midges: no evidence for sex ratio regulation

“…According to a popular theory, females emerging when and where males are abundant tend to have higher mating success. Instead, early male emergence increases males' mating opportunities (Rhainds 2010). Apart from protandry, it is generally accepted that male gall midges in most studied species have shorter life span than females (Gagne 1994;Rajamani et al Fig.…”

The Mothematics of Female Pheromone Signaling: Strategies for Aging Virgins

“…In such cases, an intermediate rather than maximal signaling effort can still be selected for, if high signaling effort is costly. Such costs can be difficult to detect precisely because females are not typically expected to evolve highly costly mate acquisition traits (Kokko and Wong 2007), but it is noteworthy that (1) costs can shape mating systems even if they are small or (2) sometimes sperm limitation can make females evolve costly mate acquisition traits (for insect data, see Charlat et al 2007;Calabrese et al 2008;Rhainds 2010; for data from spatially varying situations, see Contarini et al 2009;Rhainds 2012). Accordingly, we now assume that multiple male arrivals are not costly (we modify the above model to have k ≥ 1) and include direct costs of pheromone production.…”

“…This can lead to delayed breeding (Mori and Evenden 2012), suboptimal sex ratios of progeny (Boivin 2012;Harpur et al 2012), or complete failure to reproduce. Given that female mating failures are well documented (Calabrese et al 2008;Rhainds 2010), there are circumstances under which females should actively search for mates.…”