Genetic variation in male sexual behaviour in a population of white-footed mice in relation to photoperiod

In natural populations, genetic variation in seasonal male sexual behaviour could affect behavioural ecology and evolution. In a wild-source population of white-footed mice, Peromyscus leucopus, from Virginia, U.S.A., males experiencing short photoperiod show high levels of genetic variation in repr...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Animal behaviour 2015-06, Vol.104, p.203-212
Hauptverfasser: Sharp, Kathy, Bucci, Donna, Zelensky, Paul K., Chesney, Alanna, Tidhar, Wendy, Broussard, David R., Heideman, Paul D.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 212
container_issue
container_start_page 203
container_title Animal behaviour
container_volume 104
creator Sharp, Kathy
Bucci, Donna
Zelensky, Paul K.
Chesney, Alanna
Tidhar, Wendy
Broussard, David R.
Heideman, Paul D.
description In natural populations, genetic variation in seasonal male sexual behaviour could affect behavioural ecology and evolution. In a wild-source population of white-footed mice, Peromyscus leucopus, from Virginia, U.S.A., males experiencing short photoperiod show high levels of genetic variation in reproductive organ mass and neuroendocrine traits related to fertility. We tested whether males from two divergent selection lines, one that strongly suppresses fertility under short photoperiod (responder) and one that weakly suppresses fertility under short photoperiod (nonresponder), also differ in photoperiod-dependent sexual behaviour and responses to female olfactory cues. Under short, but not long, photoperiod, there were significant differences between responder and nonresponder males in sexual behaviour and likelihood of inseminating a female. Males that were severely oligospermic or azoospermic under short photoperiod failed to display sexual behaviour in response to an ovariectomized and hormonally primed receptive female. However, on the day following testing, females were positive for spermatozoa only when paired with a male having a sperm count in the normal range for males under long photoperiod. Males from the nonresponder line showed accelerated reproductive development under short photoperiod in response to urine-soiled bedding from females, but males from the responder line did not. The results indicate genetic variation in sexual behaviour that is expressed under short, but not long, photoperiod, and indicate a potential link between heritable neuroendocrine variation and male sexual behaviour. In winter in a natural population, this heritable behavioural variation could affect fitness, seasonal life history trade-offs and population growth. •We examined sexual behaviour of short-day responder vs nonresponder male mice.•Short, winter-like daylength repressed sexual behaviour only in the responder line.•Sexual behaviour was eliminated only if males had very low or zero sperm counts.•Odour cues from females enhanced sexual maturation in the nonresponder line.•In nature, genetically responder mice could lack sexual behaviour in winter.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.anbehav.2015.03.026
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4428349</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0003347215001268</els_id><sourcerecordid>1826621390</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c561t-1b024f01df92ddf61ab3565ba4fed96a584fb9bc32145bd0e6c13e2373caa4a03</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkk9v1DAQxS1ERZfCRwBF4sIlwX9ir3MBoaoUpEq9tGfLsSesoyQOtrOFb1-HXSrgsqfRaH7zRn5-CL0huCKYiA99pacWdnpfUUx4hVmFqXiGNgQ3vJRU0udogzFmJau39By9jLHPreCYv0DnlDeSMcY3qL-GCZIzxV4Hp5PzU-GmYtQDFBF-Lnoofh9xfgnrQBezn5fhAPqueNi5BGXnfQJbjM7ACgU4AskX884nP0Nw3r5CZ50eIrw-1gt0_-Xq7vJreXN7_e3y801puCCpJC2mdYeJ7RpqbSeIbhkXvNV1B7YRmsu6a5vWMEpq3loMwhAGlG2Z0brWmF2gjwfdeWlHsAamFPSg5uBGHX4pr536dzK5nfru96quqWR1kwXeHwWC_7FATGp00cAw6An8EhXNRlImuTyNEkmFoIQ1-DS6ZVTihrIVffcf2mf_p2yaIkJyJjEhPFP8QJngYwzQPT2RYLVmRPXqmBG1ZkRhpnJG8t7bv_152voTigx8OgCQf2nvIKhoHEwGrAtgkrLenTjxCJli0Ro</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1685380115</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Genetic variation in male sexual behaviour in a population of white-footed mice in relation to photoperiod</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Sharp, Kathy ; Bucci, Donna ; Zelensky, Paul K. ; Chesney, Alanna ; Tidhar, Wendy ; Broussard, David R. ; Heideman, Paul D.</creator><creatorcontrib>Sharp, Kathy ; Bucci, Donna ; Zelensky, Paul K. ; Chesney, Alanna ; Tidhar, Wendy ; Broussard, David R. ; Heideman, Paul D.</creatorcontrib><description>In natural populations, genetic variation in seasonal male sexual behaviour could affect behavioural ecology and evolution. In a wild-source population of white-footed mice, Peromyscus leucopus, from Virginia, U.S.A., males experiencing short photoperiod show high levels of genetic variation in reproductive organ mass and neuroendocrine traits related to fertility. We tested whether males from two divergent selection lines, one that strongly suppresses fertility under short photoperiod (responder) and one that weakly suppresses fertility under short photoperiod (nonresponder), also differ in photoperiod-dependent sexual behaviour and responses to female olfactory cues. Under short, but not long, photoperiod, there were significant differences between responder and nonresponder males in sexual behaviour and likelihood of inseminating a female. Males that were severely oligospermic or azoospermic under short photoperiod failed to display sexual behaviour in response to an ovariectomized and hormonally primed receptive female. However, on the day following testing, females were positive for spermatozoa only when paired with a male having a sperm count in the normal range for males under long photoperiod. Males from the nonresponder line showed accelerated reproductive development under short photoperiod in response to urine-soiled bedding from females, but males from the responder line did not. The results indicate genetic variation in sexual behaviour that is expressed under short, but not long, photoperiod, and indicate a potential link between heritable neuroendocrine variation and male sexual behaviour. In winter in a natural population, this heritable behavioural variation could affect fitness, seasonal life history trade-offs and population growth. •We examined sexual behaviour of short-day responder vs nonresponder male mice.•Short, winter-like daylength repressed sexual behaviour only in the responder line.•Sexual behaviour was eliminated only if males had very low or zero sperm counts.•Odour cues from females enhanced sexual maturation in the nonresponder line.•In nature, genetically responder mice could lack sexual behaviour in winter.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0003-3472</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1095-8282</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2015.03.026</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25983335</identifier><identifier>CODEN: ANBEA8</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Animal behavior ; Animal populations ; Animal reproduction ; Behavioral sciences ; evolution ; females ; fitness ; Genetic diversity ; genetic variation ; heritable variation ; life history ; male sexual behaviour ; males ; neuroendocrine trait ; normal genetic variation ; ovariectomy ; Peromyscus leucopus ; photoperiod ; photoperiod-dependent sexual behaviour ; population growth ; Rodents ; seasonal life history trade-offs ; seasonal variation ; sexual behavior ; spermatozoa ; standing variation ; Virginia ; white-footed mouse ; winter</subject><ispartof>Animal behaviour, 2015-06, Vol.104, p.203-212</ispartof><rights>2015 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour</rights><rights>Copyright Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Ltd. Jun 2015</rights><rights>2015 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour. Published by Elsevier Ltd. 2015</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c561t-1b024f01df92ddf61ab3565ba4fed96a584fb9bc32145bd0e6c13e2373caa4a03</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c561t-1b024f01df92ddf61ab3565ba4fed96a584fb9bc32145bd0e6c13e2373caa4a03</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-6722-578X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003347215001268$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25983335$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Sharp, Kathy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bucci, Donna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zelensky, Paul K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chesney, Alanna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tidhar, Wendy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Broussard, David R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heideman, Paul D.</creatorcontrib><title>Genetic variation in male sexual behaviour in a population of white-footed mice in relation to photoperiod</title><title>Animal behaviour</title><addtitle>Anim Behav</addtitle><description>In natural populations, genetic variation in seasonal male sexual behaviour could affect behavioural ecology and evolution. In a wild-source population of white-footed mice, Peromyscus leucopus, from Virginia, U.S.A., males experiencing short photoperiod show high levels of genetic variation in reproductive organ mass and neuroendocrine traits related to fertility. We tested whether males from two divergent selection lines, one that strongly suppresses fertility under short photoperiod (responder) and one that weakly suppresses fertility under short photoperiod (nonresponder), also differ in photoperiod-dependent sexual behaviour and responses to female olfactory cues. Under short, but not long, photoperiod, there were significant differences between responder and nonresponder males in sexual behaviour and likelihood of inseminating a female. Males that were severely oligospermic or azoospermic under short photoperiod failed to display sexual behaviour in response to an ovariectomized and hormonally primed receptive female. However, on the day following testing, females were positive for spermatozoa only when paired with a male having a sperm count in the normal range for males under long photoperiod. Males from the nonresponder line showed accelerated reproductive development under short photoperiod in response to urine-soiled bedding from females, but males from the responder line did not. The results indicate genetic variation in sexual behaviour that is expressed under short, but not long, photoperiod, and indicate a potential link between heritable neuroendocrine variation and male sexual behaviour. In winter in a natural population, this heritable behavioural variation could affect fitness, seasonal life history trade-offs and population growth. •We examined sexual behaviour of short-day responder vs nonresponder male mice.•Short, winter-like daylength repressed sexual behaviour only in the responder line.•Sexual behaviour was eliminated only if males had very low or zero sperm counts.•Odour cues from females enhanced sexual maturation in the nonresponder line.•In nature, genetically responder mice could lack sexual behaviour in winter.</description><subject>Animal behavior</subject><subject>Animal populations</subject><subject>Animal reproduction</subject><subject>Behavioral sciences</subject><subject>evolution</subject><subject>females</subject><subject>fitness</subject><subject>Genetic diversity</subject><subject>genetic variation</subject><subject>heritable variation</subject><subject>life history</subject><subject>male sexual behaviour</subject><subject>males</subject><subject>neuroendocrine trait</subject><subject>normal genetic variation</subject><subject>ovariectomy</subject><subject>Peromyscus leucopus</subject><subject>photoperiod</subject><subject>photoperiod-dependent sexual behaviour</subject><subject>population growth</subject><subject>Rodents</subject><subject>seasonal life history trade-offs</subject><subject>seasonal variation</subject><subject>sexual behavior</subject><subject>spermatozoa</subject><subject>standing variation</subject><subject>Virginia</subject><subject>white-footed mouse</subject><subject>winter</subject><issn>0003-3472</issn><issn>1095-8282</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkk9v1DAQxS1ERZfCRwBF4sIlwX9ir3MBoaoUpEq9tGfLsSesoyQOtrOFb1-HXSrgsqfRaH7zRn5-CL0huCKYiA99pacWdnpfUUx4hVmFqXiGNgQ3vJRU0udogzFmJau39By9jLHPreCYv0DnlDeSMcY3qL-GCZIzxV4Hp5PzU-GmYtQDFBF-Lnoofh9xfgnrQBezn5fhAPqueNi5BGXnfQJbjM7ACgU4AskX884nP0Nw3r5CZ50eIrw-1gt0_-Xq7vJreXN7_e3y801puCCpJC2mdYeJ7RpqbSeIbhkXvNV1B7YRmsu6a5vWMEpq3loMwhAGlG2Z0brWmF2gjwfdeWlHsAamFPSg5uBGHX4pr536dzK5nfru96quqWR1kwXeHwWC_7FATGp00cAw6An8EhXNRlImuTyNEkmFoIQ1-DS6ZVTihrIVffcf2mf_p2yaIkJyJjEhPFP8QJngYwzQPT2RYLVmRPXqmBG1ZkRhpnJG8t7bv_152voTigx8OgCQf2nvIKhoHEwGrAtgkrLenTjxCJli0Ro</recordid><startdate>201506</startdate><enddate>201506</enddate><creator>Sharp, Kathy</creator><creator>Bucci, Donna</creator><creator>Zelensky, Paul K.</creator><creator>Chesney, Alanna</creator><creator>Tidhar, Wendy</creator><creator>Broussard, David R.</creator><creator>Heideman, Paul D.</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Ltd</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>7S9</scope><scope>L.6</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6722-578X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201506</creationdate><title>Genetic variation in male sexual behaviour in a population of white-footed mice in relation to photoperiod</title><author>Sharp, Kathy ; Bucci, Donna ; Zelensky, Paul K. ; Chesney, Alanna ; Tidhar, Wendy ; Broussard, David R. ; Heideman, Paul D.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c561t-1b024f01df92ddf61ab3565ba4fed96a584fb9bc32145bd0e6c13e2373caa4a03</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Animal behavior</topic><topic>Animal populations</topic><topic>Animal reproduction</topic><topic>Behavioral sciences</topic><topic>evolution</topic><topic>females</topic><topic>fitness</topic><topic>Genetic diversity</topic><topic>genetic variation</topic><topic>heritable variation</topic><topic>life history</topic><topic>male sexual behaviour</topic><topic>males</topic><topic>neuroendocrine trait</topic><topic>normal genetic variation</topic><topic>ovariectomy</topic><topic>Peromyscus leucopus</topic><topic>photoperiod</topic><topic>photoperiod-dependent sexual behaviour</topic><topic>population growth</topic><topic>Rodents</topic><topic>seasonal life history trade-offs</topic><topic>seasonal variation</topic><topic>sexual behavior</topic><topic>spermatozoa</topic><topic>standing variation</topic><topic>Virginia</topic><topic>white-footed mouse</topic><topic>winter</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Sharp, Kathy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bucci, Donna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zelensky, Paul K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chesney, Alanna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tidhar, Wendy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Broussard, David R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heideman, Paul D.</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>AGRICOLA</collection><collection>AGRICOLA - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Animal behaviour</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Sharp, Kathy</au><au>Bucci, Donna</au><au>Zelensky, Paul K.</au><au>Chesney, Alanna</au><au>Tidhar, Wendy</au><au>Broussard, David R.</au><au>Heideman, Paul D.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Genetic variation in male sexual behaviour in a population of white-footed mice in relation to photoperiod</atitle><jtitle>Animal behaviour</jtitle><addtitle>Anim Behav</addtitle><date>2015-06</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>104</volume><spage>203</spage><epage>212</epage><pages>203-212</pages><issn>0003-3472</issn><eissn>1095-8282</eissn><coden>ANBEA8</coden><abstract>In natural populations, genetic variation in seasonal male sexual behaviour could affect behavioural ecology and evolution. In a wild-source population of white-footed mice, Peromyscus leucopus, from Virginia, U.S.A., males experiencing short photoperiod show high levels of genetic variation in reproductive organ mass and neuroendocrine traits related to fertility. We tested whether males from two divergent selection lines, one that strongly suppresses fertility under short photoperiod (responder) and one that weakly suppresses fertility under short photoperiod (nonresponder), also differ in photoperiod-dependent sexual behaviour and responses to female olfactory cues. Under short, but not long, photoperiod, there were significant differences between responder and nonresponder males in sexual behaviour and likelihood of inseminating a female. Males that were severely oligospermic or azoospermic under short photoperiod failed to display sexual behaviour in response to an ovariectomized and hormonally primed receptive female. However, on the day following testing, females were positive for spermatozoa only when paired with a male having a sperm count in the normal range for males under long photoperiod. Males from the nonresponder line showed accelerated reproductive development under short photoperiod in response to urine-soiled bedding from females, but males from the responder line did not. The results indicate genetic variation in sexual behaviour that is expressed under short, but not long, photoperiod, and indicate a potential link between heritable neuroendocrine variation and male sexual behaviour. In winter in a natural population, this heritable behavioural variation could affect fitness, seasonal life history trade-offs and population growth. •We examined sexual behaviour of short-day responder vs nonresponder male mice.•Short, winter-like daylength repressed sexual behaviour only in the responder line.•Sexual behaviour was eliminated only if males had very low or zero sperm counts.•Odour cues from females enhanced sexual maturation in the nonresponder line.•In nature, genetically responder mice could lack sexual behaviour in winter.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>25983335</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.anbehav.2015.03.026</doi><tpages>10</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6722-578X</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0003-3472
ispartof Animal behaviour, 2015-06, Vol.104, p.203-212
issn 0003-3472
1095-8282
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4428349
source Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Animal behavior
Animal populations
Animal reproduction
Behavioral sciences
evolution
females
fitness
Genetic diversity
genetic variation
heritable variation
life history
male sexual behaviour
males
neuroendocrine trait
normal genetic variation
ovariectomy
Peromyscus leucopus
photoperiod
photoperiod-dependent sexual behaviour
population growth
Rodents
seasonal life history trade-offs
seasonal variation
sexual behavior
spermatozoa
standing variation
Virginia
white-footed mouse
winter
title Genetic variation in male sexual behaviour in a population of white-footed mice in relation to photoperiod
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-04T19%3A50%3A14IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Genetic%20variation%20in%20male%20sexual%20behaviour%20in%20a%20population%20of%20white-footed%20mice%20in%20relation%20to%20photoperiod&rft.jtitle=Animal%20behaviour&rft.au=Sharp,%20Kathy&rft.date=2015-06&rft.volume=104&rft.spage=203&rft.epage=212&rft.pages=203-212&rft.issn=0003-3472&rft.eissn=1095-8282&rft.coden=ANBEA8&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.anbehav.2015.03.026&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1826621390%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1685380115&rft_id=info:pmid/25983335&rft_els_id=S0003347215001268&rfr_iscdi=true