Our hypothesis was that if extending matings in response to an increased risk of sperm competition is an adaptive strategy employed by males, then they must be able exert significant influence over the expression of that shared trait. Across several species of Drosophila, males exposed

to rivals prior to mating subsequently mate for significantly longer than controls not exposed to rivals ( Bretman et al., 2009, Lizé et al., 2012a, Mazzi et al., 2009 and Price et al., 2012) but see AZD6244 datasheet ( Lizé et al., 2012b). In D. melanogaster this extended mating duration is associated with significant fitness benefits for males (i.e. increased paternity in a competitive and non competitive context) mediated at least in part by the transfer of increased quantities of seminal fluid proteins ( Bretman et al., 2009 and Wigby et al., 2009). Other mechanisms may also exist, for example in Drosophila pseudoobscura responses to rivals are associated with the transfer of increased numbers of sperm ( Price et al., 2012). Females gain short-term productivity benefits from mating with males that have previously been exposed to rivals ( Bretman et al., 2009). The longer-term fitness consequences for females are not yet known, though there

are predicted to be costs. For example, receipt of seminal proteins by females can cause short term benefits in terms of www.selleckchem.com/products/chir-99021-ct99021-hcl.html increased egg laying, but longer term costs in terms of reduced lifespan and overall lifetime reproductive success ( Wigby and Chapman, 2005). Therefore, matings with males that were previously exposed to rivals, that transfer more Sfps, may be disadvantageous to females. Hence there is the possibility for sexual Tacrolimus (FK506) conflict over mating duration. We hypothesise that because males

can gain significant fitness benefits from extended mating duration following exposure to rivals (Bretman et al., 2009), they should be selected to exert a significant influence over mating duration in this social context. Its important to note that such an effect may or may not be related to sex specific control of mating duration per se. Our knowledge of the control of mating duration in Drosophila in general comes from (i) crosses between different genetic strains, artificially selected lines or different karyotypes in which mating duration appears to follow the male line of origin (e.g. in D. melanogaster ( MacBean and Parsons, 1967), D. pseudoobscura ( Kaul and Parsons, 1965 and Parsons and Kaul, 1966) and Drosophila athabasca ( Patty, 1975)), and (ii) interspecific crosses in which in D. melanogaster, Drosophila simulans, Drosophila mauritiana and Drosophila sechellia mating duration follows the pattern of the male rather than the female’s species ( Jagadeeshan and Singh, 2006).