Behav Ecol Sociobiol (1997) 40: 297±305
Ó Springer-Verlag 1997
Joel C. Trexler á Joseph Travis á Andrea Dinep
Variation among populations of the sail®n molly in the rate
of concurrent multiple paternity and its implications
for mating-system evolution
Received: 6 May 1996 / Accepted in revised form: 5 December 1996
Abstract We examined patterns of concurrent multiple
mating in a live-bearing poeciliid ®sh, the sail®n molly
(Poecilia latipinna). We tested whether the probability of
multiple paternity was related to female body size or
fertility and whether the rate of multiple paternity varied
among four populations that diered in their distributions of female body size and fertility. We analyzed data
on mother and ospring genotypes for three polymorphic allozymes by three techniques, including a maximum-likelihood estimator that accounts for sampling
error in both parental and ospring allele frequencies.
The estimated rate of multiple paternity varied between
0.09 and 0.85, and the rate in one population varied
seasonally between 0.33 (spring) and 0.85 (autumn). The
variation in these rates was not associated with variation
in body-size distributions among populations but was
closely associated with variation in size-speci®c fertility:
populations with greater variation in female fertility had
higher multiple-paternity rates. Within two populations,
logistic regression revealed that individual females of
larger body size and greater size-speci®c fertility were
more likely to carry multiply sired broods. This result is
consistent with observations made in one of the populations 5 years earlier. In general, the results strongly
suggest that the mating system varies markedly among
conspeci®c populations of sail®n mollies and that larger,
more fertile females are the objects of intermale competition.
Key words Poecilia latipinna á Mating system á
Multiple paternity á Fertility á Allozymes
Joel C. Trexler (&)
Department of Biological Science,
Florida International University, Miami, FL 33199, USA
Fax: 305-348-1986; e-mail: trexlerj@servax.®u.edu
Joseph Travis
Department of Biological Science, Florida State University,
Tallahassee, FL 32306-2043, USA
Andrea Dinep
P.O. Box 1347, Mississippi State, MS 39762-1347, USA
Introduction
High rates of concurrent multiple paternity, multiple
siring of ospring within a single brood, have become a
routine expectation in studies of natural populations
(Travis et al. 1990). With the development of sensitive
genetic markers, these observations have been extended
to social systems once thought highly monogamous
(e.g., Yezerinac et al. 1995) or strongly polygynous
without polygamy (e.g., Westneat 1993; Weatherhead
and Boag 1995). Such extensions have provoked reexaminations of these mating systems and, in some cases,
led to revisions in the prevailing hypotheses for their
evolution (Weatherhead and Boag 1995).
The converse is now also true; the discovery of low
rates of concurrent multiple paternity is deemed noteworthy and provokes reexamination of what were once
thought to be polygamous mating systems (e.g., Poldmaa
et al. 1995). Speci®c cases of low rates have been attributed to speci®c characteristics of mating systems such as
mate guarding by males (Ritchison et al. 1994; Freeland
et al. 1995), low movement rates of males (Hasselquist et
al. 1995; Stadler et al. 1995), or high costs of travel or
searching for females by males (Singer and Riechert
1995). Thus, studies of concurrent multiple paternity
have revealed unsuspected variation in both presumptively polygamous and monogamous mating systems.
Interspeci®c variation in concurrent multiple paternity rates and variation in mating systems appear to be
associated. For example, lower levels of polyandry in
eusocial Hymenoptera are associated with multiple
foundresses (Keller and Reeve 1994), and higher rates of
extra-pair paternity in passerine birds are associated
with increased plumage brightness and greater sexual
dimorphism in plumage brightness (MoÈller and Birkhead 1994). Even when broad associations are not fully
delineated, signi®cant interspeci®c variation in rates of
concurrent multiple paternity or polyandry is known in
many taxa (Wiklund and Forsberg 1991; Oldroyd et al.
1995; Moritz et al. 1995).
298
It is unclear whether conspeci®c populations exhibit
substantial variation in the rate of concurrent multiple
paternity. Two studies (Darling et al. 1980; Levine et al.
1987) found no such variation. Two others (Schwartz
et al. 1989; Poldmaa et al. 1995) also reported little
variation, but each was limited by a small sample size of
broods in one of the two populations under scrutiny.
Greene and Brown (1991) failed to detect any seasonal
variation within a single population. On the other hand,
Tilley and Hausman (1976) presented statistical estimates of concurrent multiple-paternity rates that varied
widely among four populations of salamanders. However, the rates estimable from direct counts of broods in
which three paternal alleles were observed were comparable among the populations, and Tilley and Hausman (1976, p. 740) were unwilling to accept the variation
in statistical estimates as real because of the sampling
problems involved.
There are two reasons to expect signi®cant variation
among populations in rates of multiple paternity and
concomitant variation in mating system. First, variation
among populations in sexual and mating behaviors is
proving widespread, perhaps as much so as distinctions
in life-history or morphological traits (Breden and
Stoner 1987; Houde and Endler 1990; Endler and Houde
1995; Ptacek and Travis 1996). Second, and more important, in many studies of concurrent multiple paternity in single populations, marked phenotypic
distinctions have been found between females producing
singly sired broods and those producing multiply sired
broods (Borowsky and Kallman 1976; Borowsky and
Khouri 1976; Darling et al. 1980; Travis et al. 1990;
Greene and Brown 1991). If the distribution of those
phenotypic traits varies from one population to another,
or if the variance among females in those traits diers
from one population to another, then we might expect
concomitant variation in the rate of multiple paternity.
Such an intraspeci®c pattern would represent a prime
candidate system for testing whether ®ne-scale matingsystem variation is a product of adaptive evolution
(Reznick and Travis 1996).
The sail®n molly, Poecilia latipinna, a live-bearing
®sh in the poeciliid family, is an excellent species in
which to explore this phenomenon. Populations exhibit
extensive variation in male and female body-size distributions, various life-history traits (Travis and Trexler
1987), and size-speci®c male sexual behaviors (Ptacek
and Travis 1996). In previous work (Travis et al. 1990)
we found that approximately half of the females in a
single population could be diagnosed as carrying multiply sired broods; these ®sh are socially polygamous,
although male-male interactions and female predilections appear to favor enhanced mating success for larger
males (M. Ptacek and J. Travis, unpublished work; reviewed by Travis 1994). However, the females with
multiply sired broods were much larger in size and
higher in size-speci®c fertility than females who could
not be diagnosed as carrying multiply sired broods. We
interpreted this result to indicate that larger, more fertile
females were the primary foci for male-male interactions, which was consistent with behavioral observations
(Travis 1994). Given that populations vary in the bodysize distributions of females and in the distribution of
size-speci®c fertility (Travis and Trexler 1987), it seems
likely that the rate of concurrent multiple paternity
varies as well and would indicate associated variation in
the mating system of these ®sh.
In this paper we report the results of a more extensive
examination of concurrent multiple paternity rates in
®ve samples from four natural populations that vary in
their distributions of female body size and size-speci®c
fertility. These results indicate that the rates are quite
variable; the pattern of this variation suggests that the
level of variation among females in size-speci®c fertility
is responsible for signi®cant variation in the mating
system of these ®shes from one location to another.
Methods
Sampling
We obtained allozyme frequency data for three polymorphic loci
from pregnant sail®n mollies and their embryos collected at four
locations in Wakulla County, Florida. These data permitted us to
identify the likely paternal allelic contribution to each ospring and
estimate the minimum number of males necessary to account for
the genetic diversity of each brood. We chose study populations to
represent a range of body size distributions; Lighthouse Pond
(LHP) and Mounds Pond (MDS) harbored relatively small mollies,
and Wakulla Beach (WKB) and Live Oak Island (LO) relatively
large ones (Table 1). We collected ®sh from all four locations in
May 1990 and made an additional collection at LO in September
1990 (LOF refers to the fall, September 1990, LO sample and LOS
refers to the spring, May 1990, sample). At each site we collected as
many pregnant females as possible, usually more than 20, along
with a sample of males and nongravid females. In cases where
many females were collected, we chose to analyze broods from a
sample of individuals that represented the full size range in that
population.
Genetic analysis
Protein samples from gravid females and up to 25 embryos from
each brood were electrophoresed in horizontal starch gels. We examined no more than 25 embryos from any brood to minimize any
bias toward enhancing the probability of detecting multiple paternity from larger, more fertile females as a result of the larger
sample size of ospring available. For such large broods, the mass
of embryos was removed and embryos were chosen haphazardly
from all parts of the ovary. Females from three populations averaged more than 25 ospring (Table 1). Standard length (the distance from the mouth to the base of the caudal peduncle measured
dorsally) was measured on all adult ®sh, and brood size was recorded for all females. Eye- and muscle-tissue samples were pooled
and homogenized, whereas the liver and embryos were homogenized individually in 0.5 ll of cold grinding solution (0.01 M TRIS,
0.001 M EDTA, 0.00005 M NADP, pH 7:0). Samples were run in
10% horizontal starch gels (Connaught starch) with tris-citrate
buer (0.687 M TRIS, 0.157 M citric acid, pH 8:0), for about
15 h. We scored three presumptive loci: Gpi-2 (glucose phosphate
isomerase, E.C. no. 5.3.1.9); Pgm-3 (phosphoglucomutase, E.C. no.
5.4.2.2); and Icd-2 (isocitric dehydrogenase, E.C. no. 1.1.1.42).
Staining followed Harris and Hopkinson (1976) with the omission
of agar from stain solutions.
299
Statistical analysis
We used a variety of methods to infer a minimum number of sires
for each brood, given the mother's genotype (Levine et al. 1980).
The simplest method is the direct one: observation of three or more
paternal alleles at a locus. This method has the virtue of simplicity
but lacks power; it cannot detect multiple paternity when multiple
sires share the same genotype or when sires contribute two or fewer
alleles distinct from those of the mother. These disadvantages re¯ect a problem in the statistical sampling of parental genotypes. In
some cases, the progeny being assayed may fail to re¯ect the diversity of sperm genotypes stored by a female, and thus some informative combinations are not seen; this is a problem in the
statistical sampling of progeny (Akin et al. 1984).
Various methods can be employed to use allele frequency data
to overcome those limitations and re®ne the estimated rate of
concurrent multiple paternity. The simplest of these is to analyze
the ratio of ospring genotypes in broods with only one or two
apparent paternal alleles for unlikely genotypic ratios under a hypothesis of single paternity (Travis et al. 1990). For homozygous
females, assuming a single sire, there are two possible genotypic
ratios of ospring (1:1 for a heterozygous sire or all the same for a
homozygous one). The broods of heterozygous females and a single
sire could, analogously, produce three dierent ratios, depending
upon the sire's genotype (1:1, 1:2:1, or 1:1:1:1). If no Mendelian
genotypic ratio describing the array of a single male was consistent
with the observed progeny array, the brood is diagnosed as multiply sired. This is a simple way to compensate for the parental
sampling problem if brood sizes are large enough to preclude an
ospring sampling problem. This method carries no implicit assumption about how many sires contribute to a brood, nor does it
assume that each sire contributes equally to the brood for an unlikely genotypic ratio to be detected. The additional multiply sired
broods diagnosed from this procedure can be added to those diagnosed by direct observation of three or more paternal alleles to
provide a more or less direct estimate of the rate of concurrent
multiple paternity. We refer to this estimate as method 1.
A second way to overcome the limitations of using only observations of at least three paternal alleles is to estimate the
probability of not detecting multiple siring because of the parental
sampling problem and to adjust the minimal rate (estimated from
observation of three or more paternal alleles) for this probability.
The simplest way to calculate the probability of nondetection is to
equate it to the probability that two sires would contribute less than
three dierent paternal alleles between them. This probability is
estimable by the product, across loci, of the cumulative frequency
of the germane genotypic combinations at each locus (cf. Birdsall
and Nash 1973; Merritt and Wu 1975; Tilley and Hausman 1976;
McCauley and O'Donnell 1984; Travis et al. 1990). The true
number of multiply sired broods is then estimated by division of the
number of multiply sired broods detected by observation of three or
more paternal alleles by 1 ) Pnd, where Pnd is the estimated probability of nondetection. This method, which we denote method 2,
will estimate the rate of concurrent multiple paternity accurately if
mating is at random, only two sires contribute to multiply sired
broods, each sire in a multiply sired brood contributes equally, and
there is no appreciable progeny sampling problem.
A third, more complicated way to overcome the limitations of
direct observations of three or more paternal alleles is to use the
maximum likelihood methods of Akin et al. (1984) or Williams and
Evarts (1989) to account for both parental and progeny sampling
problems. These methods use more of the information available in
the data and allow standard errors of the estimates to be calculated.
Both techniques calculate likelihoods of brood composition under
alternative presumptions of single or dual siring and assume random mating, no sperm precedence, and no sperm selection.
Each maximum likelihood method employs a dierent premise
to calculate the likelihood of multiple paternity, and as a result,
each is more suitable for dierent types of data. Akin et al. (1984)
use the presence and absence of distinct genotypes in a brood, while
Williams and Evarts (1989) use unlikely progeny ratios. The
method of Akin et al. (1984) is more ecient (smaller standard
errors) for highly polymorphic loci (four or more alleles with intermediate frequency), whereas Williams and Evarts' technique is
more ecient for loci with low allelic diversity (two or three alleles
with intermediate frequency; see Williams and Evarts 1989 for
more detailed criteria identifying conditions favoring one or the
other technique). In our data, only Icd-2 proved suciently polymorphic to favor analysis by the technique of Akin et al. (1984),
and then only clearly so for one population. An additional advantage to the Williams-Evarts method is that their estimator
can be combined across loci, even when those loci vary in allelic
diversity, and thereby yield lower standard errors. In all cases, the
Williams-Evarts method yielded smaller con®dence intervals than
the technique of Akin et al. (1984) from our data, and the estimates from the method of Akin et al. (1984) were within the
Williams and Evarts-derived con®dence intervals. With these considerations we chose the Williams-Evarts method, which we denote
method 3.
We used logistic regression to examine the relationship of female size and fecundity to multiple paternity. Logistic regression
was chosen because it employs a log-linear model to elucidate the
relationship of a binary dependent variable (presence or absence of
multiple paternity) with continuous independent variables (Trexler
and Travis 1993). The analysis requires ®tting a series of models to
the data, starting with a ``full model'' that includes all independent
variables and their interactions, and repeating the procedure with
models sequentially eliminating one independent variable at a time.
The dierence in the log likelihood of each sequential model,
multiplied by )2, is a v2 statistic with 1 df that indicates the contribution of the term eliminated. All analyses using embryo number
and female size were performed after these variables were subjected
to the natural-log transformation.
Results
Female body size varied widely among the populations
(Table 1). Average female body size in the population
with the largest females was 50% higher than that in the
population with the smallest females. On the other
hand, the relative variation in female size within a
population, as measured by the coecient of variation
in size (CV), was comparable across populations. Male
size also varied signi®cantly among populations (Table 1) and the rank order of the male and female size
was concordant.
Average brood size varied greatly among the four
study populations, spanning an order of magnitude
from 7.4 to 75.7. Only the LOS and WKB populations
did not dier from all others in average brood size,
before adjusting for inter-population dierences in female size (Table 1). Brood size increased as female size
increased [analysis of covariance: ln (brood size) vs. ln
(female size), slope dierent from zero, F1;116
133:3; P < 0:001] and the slopes did not dier among
populations (population by female size interaction:
F4;116 0:16; P 0:127). The average size-speci®c fertility, estimated at the grand mean female standard
length of 38.7 mm, varied from 14.9 at MDS to 27.7 at
LOF, a dierence of 86%. For this size female, all
populations but one had similar brood sizes; LOF females displayed greater size-adjusted brood size than all
other populations, including the same population in
spring (LOS; Table 1).
300
Table 1 Description of the ®sh populations studied. CV is the
coecient of variation, n is the sample size (for female standard
length including all sexually mature females, pregnant and not so).
Mean brood sizes, adjusted to grand mean of female size by ANCOVA, are reported in parentheses. CD indicates the coecient of
Population
Female
Male
Standard length
MDS
LHP
WKB
LOS
LOF
determination for the regression of brood size on female size. Superscript numbers indicate means that dier at the P 0:05 level by
Tukey's HSD multiple comparisons test. Only two sexually mature
males were collected in the LOF sample
Brood size
n
mean
CV(%)
n
mean
126
117
35
66
27
32.41
26.82
48.03
43.34
48.43
14
8
13
14
14
22
42
16
28
18
14.01
7.42
41.93
41.73
75.74
The precision with which brood size could be predicted from female body size within a population was
highly variable from one population to another
(Table 1; coecients of determination for the regression
of brood size on female body size ranged from 0.21 to
0.72). The level of predictability was unrelated to the
average female body size or to the level of relative
variation in size (CV) found there. For example, the
regressions of brood size on female size from the two
locations with the smallest females, MDS and LHP, had
the least and greatest precision respectively.
Allelic diversity varied among the three loci examined; ®ve alleles were observed at Icd-2, four at Gpi-2,
and three at Pgm-3 (Table 2). Although allele frequencies were broadly comparable across the ®ve populations, there were notable distinctions in levels of genetic
variance. There was more allelic diversity for Icd-2 at
LOF than MDS, and greater diversity for Gpi-2 at
WKB than at LOS. Only Icd-2 was consistently out of
Hardy-Weinberg frequencies in the adult populations,
displaying signi®cant heterozygote de®ciencies in three
of the ®ve samples (LHP, MDS, WKB; see Dinep 1991).
These deviations probably arose from misclassi®cation
of a small number of the rare genotypes. The Pgm-3
locus exhibited a similar pattern of heterozygote de®ciency at the WKB population.
Although multiple paternity was detected in all populations, there was considerable variation among them
in the estimated rates (Table 3). Estimates from methods
1 and 3, which ought to correspond the most for any
single population because of their similar premises,
ranged over an order of magnitude; method 2 yielded
only a ®ve-fold range. The probabilities of not detecting
multiple siring by using direct observation of three or
more paternal alleles varied over a two-fold range. There
was no qualitative relationship of multiple paternity rate
estimated by any method with the number of broods
observed in a population.
The three methods were most consistent for LHP even
though the small brood sizes might have created a signi®cant progeny sampling problem. Nonetheless, all
three estimates are below 0.10, and the standard error for
Standard length
(14.91)
(17.51)
(19.71)
(19.91)
(27.72)
CV(%)
CD
n
mean
CV(%)
77
28
42
56
42
0.72
0.21
0.54
0.59
0.66
36
33
19
29
±
30.11
23.42
42.53
40.63
±
17
14
26
16
±
method 3 is not large. All of the extant evidence indicates
that multiple paternity rates here were very low.
The three methods were reasonably consistent for
LOS. In this population, methods 1 and 3 provided
comparable estimates and indicated a multiple-paternity
rate of about 0.35; method 2 provided a slight underestimate. Method 2 uses the progeny information least
and is more likely to be awry when compared to the
others.
Although there was less numerical consistency among
methods for LOF, methods 1 and 3 estimated very high
rates of multiple paternity. The estimate from method 1
was 12-fold larger than the comparable estimate for
LHP, and the method 3 estimate was 9-fold larger. As
was the case for LOS, method 2, which uses the least
Table 2 Allelic frequencies of the three loci examined. Data from
all adult females (gravid and nongravid) and males are pooled; n
indicates sample size. Allelic designations are ordered by rate of
migration
Locus
Population
MDS
LHP
WKB
LOS
LOF
Pgm-3
(n)
1
2
3
144
0.208
0.750
0.042
150
0.213
0.773
0.013
49
0.204
0.745
0.051
94
0.101
0.835
0.064
28
0.196
0.804
0.000
Gpi-2
(n)
1
2
3
4
144
0.083
0.781
0.118
0.017
154
0.097
0.789
0.110
0.003
49
0.102
0.673
0.163
0.061
101
0.035
0.817
0.129
0.020
29
0.017
0.759
0.207
0.017
Icd-2
(n)
1
2
3
4
5
135
0.093
0.670
0.148
0.074
0.015
151
0.083
0.530
0.235
0.126
0.026
50
0.160
0.580
0.170
0.090
0.000
96
0.063
0.521
0.266
0.141
0.010
29
0.259
0.448
0.207
0.034
0.052
301
Table 3 Concurrent multiple-paternity estimates obtained from
three techniques; n indicates the number of females examined, 3PA
is the number of females identi®ed as multiply mated by the presence of 3 paternal alleles, G is the number of females indicated as
multiply mated by G-test, and total refers to the estimated number
of multiply mated females by 3PA and G-test. Rate method 1 is the
multiple paternity rate estimated by method 1. Pnd indicates the
cumulative probability of two males' siring a brood and contributing less than 3 unique alleles, and rate method 2 is the resulting estimate of multiple paternity rate. Rate method 3 indicates
the results from the Williams-Evart technique and their associated
standard errors
Population
n
3PA
G
Total
(3PA+G)
Rate
method 1
Pnd
Rate
method 2
Rate
method 3
MDS
LHP
WKB
LOS
LOF
22
42
16
28
18
5
2
3
4
4
4
0
3
6
7
9
2
6
10
11
0.41
0.05
0.37
0.36
0.61
0.40
0.29
0.19
0.34
0.23
0.38
0.07
0.23
0.22
0.29
0.62
0.09
0.17
0.33
0.85
progeny information, provided a much lower estimate
than the others. The magnitude of the discrepancy suggests a strong departure from the conditions assumed by
method 2; it is reasonable to conclude the rate of multiple paternity was very high in LOF.
The three methods agree broadly for MDS in diagnosing a rate of multiple paternity that was intermediate
between the low rate of LHP and the high rate of LOF.
Methods 1 and 2 yielded essentially the same answer.
The higher estimate from method 3 probably re¯ects the
increase indicated by accounting for progeny sampling
because, like LHP, MDS had relatively low brood sizes.
The MDS sample had the largest standard error, which
was also a likely re¯ection of a progeny sampling
problem.
The most dicult statistical results to reconcile are
those in WKB. The direction of the discrepancy between
methods 1 and 3 is puzzling. In principle, method 3
should provide an estimate comparable to or greater
than that provided by method 1; in this case, method 3
estimated a rate of multiple paternity that was about half
that detected by method 1. It is very possible that the
maximum likelihood method is poorly behaved here.
Method 3 works by pooling the less common alleles into
a single class and thereby recreating a two-allele situation
(the most common single allele and the pooled alternatives). The more polymorphic the locus, the less accurately the method performs. WKB is the most
polymorphic population at Pgm-3 and Gpi-2, and this
may be the source of the discrepancy. Method 1 indicates
a rate of multiple paternity comparable to that of LOS.
Logistic regression analysis indicated no relationship
between the probability that an individual female was
multiply mated and her body or brood size in three of
the ®ve samples (Figs. 1, 2). The change in the log
likelihood estimate for the full model and one with only
a constant was not signi®cant for the data from WKB,
LOS, and LHP (Fig. 1; WKB: 2 0:971; P 0:39;
LOS: 2 2:64; P 0:11; LHP: 2 0:494; P 0:51).
There was evidence that female characteristics were
related to multiple siring of broods in the spring sample
from the Live Oak population (LOS). The LOS populations displayed a signi®cant relationship between the
0.33
0.27
0.22
0.21
0.25
probability of multiple paternity and female size and
brood size (Fig. 2; full model, LOS: 2 10:17;
P 0:002). However, there was an interaction between
female size and fecundity in the probability of multiple
paternity (Fig. 3). The source of this interaction is illustrated in plots of the predicted probability of multiple
paternity from the full model versus female length and
brood size (Fig. 2). The two largest and most fecund
females in this sample (marked A and B) were scored as
singly mated (Fig. 2, top); the model predicted a low
probability of multiple mating for them (Fig. 2, middle
and bottom). However the largest females scored as
multiply mated (marked 3 and 4) had lower fecundity
than a third multiply mated female that was smaller
(marked 1). The full model yielded a moderate predicted
probability of multiple paternity for female 1 and high
probabilities for females 3 and 4. Female 2 had the
highest probability of multiple paternity; she had the
second highest fecundity of the multiply mated females
(Fig. 2, bottom panel) but was not especially large
(Fig. 2, middle panel). The interaction eect of the full
model thus indicates that either large body size or brood
size separately yields high probability of multiple paternity, whereas females that are both large and fecund have
much lower probabilities. This result is undoubtedly
caused by a high leverage eect of females A and B on the
regression and is probably not a real phenomenon.
We found evidence of a relationship of multiple paternity and female characteristics in the MDS population (Fig. 1, full model: 2 2:96; P 0:09). Neither
female size, brood size, nor their interaction was signi®cant individually in the MDS data, probably because of
their weak individual eects and small sample sizes. The
full model was made signi®cant by the combined eects
of female size and brood size, strengthened by their
colinearity. This is the same pattern seen in the results
from LOS, where all three model terms are highly signi®cant when removed singly from a saturated model
but are less signi®cant when compared to a model with
only a constant (Fig. 3). Given the similarities in data
structure between LOS and MDS, we conclude that the
eects are real in the MDS population but were not
statistically signi®cant because of low statistical power.
302
Fig. 1 Brood size relative to female standard length for females examined for multiple paternity from four of the ®ve study populations.Filled
circles indicate females identi®ed as multiply mated by direct or indirect methods; open circles indicate females not shown to be multiply mated
Discussion
Our ®ndings are consistent with our earlier study in indicating that the characteristics of females can in¯uence
the probability of multiple paternity, but they also suggest seasonal and geographic variation in the mating
system. When we consider the estimates, sample sizes,
and standard errors, we conclude that there was genuine
variability among these populations in the rate of concurrent multiple paternity. The most reasonable conclusion is that the rate was genuinely very low at LHP,
genuinely very high at LOF, and intermediate elsewhere.
This study, along with our earlier work, provides indirect evidence that male sail®n mollies in natural populations can identify more fertile females and make them
a focus of their mating eorts.
Two lines of evidence support the primacy of sizespeci®c fertility over that of female body size as the best
predictor of the probability of multiple paternity. First,
in the LOS data, brood size yields a greater reduction in
log likelihood when removed from a reduced model than
does standard length. The same pattern was noted in
1985 (Travis et al. 1990; Trexler and Travis 1993). Second, the rank order of relative variation in fertility
(Table 1, CV) in spring is comparable to that of multiple
paternity rate (LHP < WKB £ LOS < MDS). Malemale competition for the most fertile females may be
greatest in those populations where the range of sizespeci®c fertility is greatest. Male mollies can clearly
distinguish receptive from nonreceptive females (Farr
and Travis 1986; Sumner et al. 1994) so it is reasonable
to postulate that their diagnostic abilities may be even
more re®ned.
We failed to identify any consistent pattern of multiple
paternity with respect to the size distribution of males.
The two populations with the lowest frequency of multiple paternity included the ones with the smallest and
largest average size of male ®sh (LHP and WKB). There
might be a crude pattern with respect to male courtship
behavior; Ptacek and Travis (1996) showed that the sizespeci®c rate of male courtship behavior varied among
these populations in the order MDS > LO > WKB
(LHP was not studied), and this rank order is reminiscent
of that of spring multiple paternity at least insofar as
MDS exceeds the others. It is striking that this is also the
rank order for these three populations in the variance in
size-speci®c fertility; perhaps male courtship rates match
the variance in size-speci®c fertility (being higher where
there is more variance and more potential ®tness variance
at stake), and the dierent social interactions that result
determine rates of multiple paternity. Although it is
tempting to speculate about this trivariate relationship,
the data are too tenuous at this time to consider this more
than a working hypothesis.
We observed a marked dierence in the probability of
multiple paternity between our spring and fall LO data,
but it is unclear whether this dierence has a biological
signi®cance. One possibility is that multiple paternity in
the fall is higher as a result of accumulated sperm stored
303
Fig. 3 A ¯ow chart of the results of analysis of probability of multiple
mating relative to female length and brood size for females from Live
Oak in spring. Numbers in the boxes indicate the log likelihood of each
model, and the numbers on the arrows indicate the change in log
likelihood as each term is excluded from analysis. The change in log
likelihood multiplied by )2 is a chi-square statistic with 1 df
Fig. 2 Analysis of eects of brood size relative to standard length on
the probability of multiple paternity for females from the spring
sample from Live Oak Island. The top panel illustrates brood size
relative to standard length, the middle panel is the predicted
probability from logistic regression relative female standard length,
and the bottom panel is the predicted probability relative to brood size.
Filled circles indicate females identi®ed as multiply mated by direct or
indirect methods; open circles indicate females not shown to be
multiply mated. Numbers and letters identify particular females
discussed in the text
over the summer reproductive season (but see below
regarding sperm longevity). We observed a signi®cant
association between female body size and size-speci®c
fertility and the probability of carrying a multiply sired
brood in this population from collections made in the
springs of both 1985 and 1990. In contrast, we observed
no such associations in the fall 1990 sample, and there is
little indication in the data that a larger sample size
would reveal an association comparable in strength to
that found in the spring samples. This result supports
the argument that the seasonal dierence is real and
meaningful; the argument would be stronger with another autumn sample.
Large females may have higher rates of multiple
mating because they are older and have accumulated
more sperm over their reproductive lifetime. Within a
population, the relatively large females tend to be older
females (female size is an increasing but decelerating
function of female age: Snelson 1982; J. Travis, unpublished work), while among population dierences in female size may re¯ect environmental in¯uence on growth
in addition to age structure (Trexler et al. 1990). Although poeciliid sperm can retain viability within folds
of the ovary for several brood cycles, two observations
weaken the likelihood of this hypothesis as the sole explanation for the patterns in our data. First, there is a
marked decline in the viability of stored sperm by a female's third brood with such sperm (Lodi 1981; K. Silvestre, M. Ptacek, and J. Travis, unpublished work);
female mollies produce a third brood at a body size
within the range of the larger females in this study, so
this decline is relevant within the size range of females
observed here. Second, newer sperm may displace older
sperm (Winge 1937). This hypothesis cannot, of course,
be rejected and a de®nitive answer awaits further study.
The major source of sampling error in estimating the
rate of multiple paternity in this study arises from parental sampling. The error rate from progeny sampling
depends on brood sizes, ospring sample sizes, and allele
frequencies. Our sample sizes are constant for WKB,
LOS, and LOF because all broods exceeded size 25.
Thus, our observation of increased multiple paternity in
larger females at LOS, and not at WKB, which had the
same directly observed rate (method 1), is not a sampling
artifact. For species with large broods, we recommend
samples in excess of 20 such that males siring a minimum
of 5% of the ospring are likely to be represented in the
progeny sample screened (i.e., to minimize progeny
sampling error). Variation among populations in brood
size produces an unavoidable bias from parental sampling for making comparisons. In our study, most
304
broods from LHP were substantially smaller than the 25
embryos screened for the other populations. Progeny
sampling was not a problem because we sampled entire
broods of ospring, but parental sampling error was
increased compared to populations with large broods.
Small brood sizes decrease the power to detect multiple
males with some genotypic combinations, e.g., a heterozygote and a homozygote sharing one of the heterozygote's alleles. This results in larger uncertainty for
multiple paternity estimates made from small, compared
to large, samples. Williams and Evarts (1989) discuss
this in more detail and evaluate cases with variation in
sample size and allele frequencies. Our methods 1 and 2
do not account for this source of bias in estimating
multiple paternity rate, while method 3 does (as does the
method of Akins et al. 1984).
Although it is tempting to consider DNA ®ngerprinting methods for increasing our power to detect
multiple paternity, their statistical power in this context
is not clearly greater than that of allozymes. The dilemma with DNA ®ngerprinting in a study of a natural
population like this one is that there are no putative sires
against which to test the ospring. The detection of
multiple paternity therefore translates into one of two
statistical problems, either the detection of half-sib pairs
among broodmates or the rejection of an average level
of relatedness consonant with all individuals being full
sibs. The higher the rate of band-sharing among unrelated individuals, the more formidable these problems
become (Lynch 1988). We found that a CAC5 probe
applied to these sail®n molly populations yielded a
band-sharing rate among randomly chosen males of
0.25; large standard errors in the estimation of relatedness can be expected with this rate of band-sharing.
With several moderately polymorphic allozyme loci
available and the ability to apply Mendelian expectations in their interpretation, we found the allozymes to
have more power than this single ®ngerprint probe. To
be sure, the addition of more ®ngerprint probes could tip
the balance in their favor, but resolution of additional
inexpensive allozyme systems might be an equally productive eort.
It would be useful to examine whether females derive
bene®ts from carrying multiply sired young or whether
the distribution of concurrent multiple paternity is
strictly a function of male-male interactions around
agnostic females. Three classes of bene®ts have been
postulated to accrue to females from carrying multiply
sired broods. First, when males provide nutritional
material with spermatophores, females receive a net
energy gain from being multiply inseminated (Pardo
et al. 1995). This is not the case for mollies; there is no
known energy transfer with spermatophores, and experimental studies have revealed no fertility gains
through multiple mating (J. Travis, unpublished work).
Second, carrying multiply sired broods can represent a
form of genetic bet-hedging when ospring may be released into a variable environment (Westneat et al. 1990;
Keller and Reeve 1994). There is no reason to discard
this hypothesis in mollies. Third, through multiple insemination, females might ensure that their ospring are
sired by males with preferred phenotypes, perhaps by
engaging in matings that circumvent male-male competition (MoÈller and Birkhead 1994) or through passive
acceptance of the outcome of sperm competition (presuming a genetic covariance between competitive ability
of sperm and preferred male phenotype; Madsen et al.
1992; Murie 1995). It is unclear how this hypothesis
could apply to mollies; female predilections and the
outcome of male-male interactions favor the same bodysize phenotype, larger males, and there would seem little
additional constructive role for multiple insemination
in this context (Farr and Travis 1986; Travis 1994;
M. Ptacek and J. Travis, unpublished work).
Our ®ndings have considerable implications for other
research into mating systems in natural populations. The
primary one is that seasonal and geographic variation in
mating system are likely to be more commonplace than
presently appreciated. The secondary one is the suggestion that mating systems could be structured around
variance in female fertility as much as in male behavior
or genotype; although not new, this suggestion deserves
more attention than it presently receives.
Acknowledgements We gratefully acknowledge Chris Williams for
generously sharing his programs and knowledge for estimating
concurrent multiple paternity rate. Also, Tom Laughlin and Bruce
Turner provided instruction and laboratory space of DNA ®ngerprint analyses. This research was funded by National Science
Foundation grants BSR 88-18001 and DEB 92-20849 to J. Travis
and a faculty development grant to J. Trexler from the University
of Mississippi.
References
Akin E, Levene H, Levene L, Rockwell R (1984) A conservative
procedure for the estimation of multiple insemination in
Drosophila. Am Nat 124:723±737
Birdsall DA, Nash D (1973) Occurrence of successful multiple insemination in females in natural populations of deer mice
(Peromyscus maniculatus). Evolution 27:106±110
Borowsky R, Kallman KD (1976) Patterns of mating in natural
populations of Xiphophorus (Pisces: Poeciliidae). I. X. maculatus
from Belize and Mexico. Evolution 30:693±706
Borowsky R, Khouri J (1976) Patterns of mating in natural populations of Xiphophorus. II. X. variatus from Tamaulipas, Mexico. Copeia 1976:727±734
Breden F, Stoner G (1987) Male predation risk determines female
preference in the Trinidad guppy. Nature 329:831±835
Darling JS, Noble ML, Shaw E (1980) Reproductive strategies in
the surfperches. I. Multiple insemination in natural populations
of the shiner perch, Cymatogaster aggregata. Evolution 34:271±
277
Dinep A (1991) Patterns of multiple paternity in the sail®n molly
(Poecilia latipinna). MS thesis, University of Mississippi, Oxford
Endler JA, Houde AE (1995) Geographic variation in female
preferences for male traits in Poecilia reticulata. Evolution
49:456±468
Farr JA, Travis J (1986) Fertility advertisement by female sail®n
mollies, Poecilia latipinna (Pisces: Poeciliidae). Copeia
1986:467±472
305
Freeland JR, Hannon SJ, Dobush G, Boag PT (1995) Extra-pair
paternity in willow ptarmigan broods: measuring costs of
polygyny to males. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 36:349±355
Greene JM, Brown KL (1991) Demographic and genetic characteristics of multiply inseminated female mosquito®sh (Gambusia
anis). Copeia 1991:434±444
Harris H, Hopkinson DA (1976) Handbook of enzyme electrophoresis in human genetics. North Holland, Amsterdam
Hasselquist D, Bensch S, Von Schantz T (1995) Low frequency of
extrapair paternity in the polygynous great reed warbler, Acrocephalus arundinaceus. Behav Ecol 6:27±38
Houde AE, Endler JA (1990) Correlated evolution of female
mating preferences and male color patterns in the guppy, Poecilia reticulata. Science 248:1405±1408
Keller L, Reeve HK (1994) Genetic variability, queen number, and
polyandry in social Hymenoptera. Evolution 48:694±704
Levine L, Asmussen M, Olvera O, Powell JR, Rosa ME de la,
Salceda VM, Gaso VM, GuzmaÂn J, Anderson WW (1980)
Population genetics of Mexican Drosophila. V. A high rate of
multiple insemination in a natural population of Drosophila
pseudoobscura. Am Nat 116:493±503
Levine L, Akin E, Olvera O, Gaso MI, Rockwell RF, Gonzalez F,
Rosa ME de la, GuzmaÂn J (1987) Chromosomal and behavioral
studies of Mexican Drosophila. Am Nat 129:458±462
Lodi E (1981) Competition between palla and normal bearing
spermatozoa of Poecilia reticulata (Pisces: Poeciliidae). Copeia
1987:624±629
Lynch M (1988) Estimation of relatedness by DNA ®ngerprinting.
Mol Biol Evol 5:584±599
Madsen T, Shine R, Loman J, HaÊkansson T (1992) Why do females copulate so frequently? Nature 355:440±441
McCauley DE, O'Donnell R (1984) The eect of multiple mating
on genetic relatedness in larval aggregations of the imported
willow leaf beetle (Plagrodera versicolora, Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 15:287±291
Merritt RB, Wu BJ (1975) On the quanti®cation of promiscuity (or
``Promyscus'' maniculatus?). Evolution 29:575±578
MoÈller AP, Birkhead TR (1994) The evolution of plumage
brightness in birds is related to extrapair paternity. Evolution
48:1089±1100
Moritz RFA, Kryger P, Koeniger G, Koeniger N, Estoup A,
Tingek S (1995) High degree of polyandry in Apis dorsata
queens detected by DNA microsatellite variability. Behav Ecol
Sociobiol 37:357±363
Murie JO (1995) Mating behavior of Columbian ground squirrels.
1. Multiple mating by females and multiple paternity. Can J
Zool 73:1819±1826
Oldroyd BP, Smolenski AJ, Cornuet J-M, Wonsiri S, Estoup A,
Rinderer TE (1995) Levels of polyandry and intracolonial genetic relationships in Apis ¯orea. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 37:329±
336
Pardo MC, Lopezleon MD, Hewitt GM, Camacho JPM (1995)
Female ®tness is increased by frequent mating in grasshoppers.
Heredity 74:654±660
Poldmaa T, Montgomerie R, Boag P (1995) Mating system of the
cooperatively breeding noisy miner Manorina melanocephala, as
revealed by DNA pro®ling. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 37:137±143
Ptacek MB, Travis J (1996) Interpopulation variation in male
mating behaviour in the sail®n molly, Poecilia latipinna. Anim
Behav 52:59±71
Reznick D, Travis J (1996) Empirical studies of adaptation. In:
Rose M, Lauder G (eds) Adaptation: perspectives and new
approaches. Academic Press, New York, pp 283±289
Ritchison G, Klatt PH, Westneat DF (1994) Mate guarding and
extra-pair paternity in northern cardinals. Condor 96:1055±1063
Schwartz JM, McCracken GF, Burgthardt GM (1989) Multiple
paternity in wild populations of the garter snake, Thamnophis
sirtalis. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 25:269±273
Singer F, Riechert SE (1995) Mating system and mating success of
the desert spider Agelenopsis aperta. Behav Ecol Sociobiol
36:313±322
Snelson FF Jr (1982) Indeterminate growth in males of the sail®n
molly, Poecilia latipinna. Copeia 1982:296±304
Stadler T, Weisner S, Streit B (1995) Outcrossing rates and correlated matings in a predominantly sel®ng fresh-water snail. Proc
R Soc Lond B 262:119±125
Sumner IT, Travis J, Wilson CD (1994) Methods of female fertility
advertisement and variation among males in responsiveness in
the sail®n molly (Poecilia latipinna). Copeia 1994:27±34
Tilley SG, Hausman JS (1976) Allozymic variation and occurrence
of multiple inseminations in populations of the salamander
Desmognathus ochrophaeus. Copeia 1976:734±741
Travis J (1994) Size-dependent behavioral variation and its genetic
control within and among populations. In: Boake RB (ed)
Quantitative genetic studies of behavioral ecology. University
of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 165±187
Travis J, Trexler J (1987) Regional variation in habitat requirements of the sail®n molly, with special reference to the Florida
Keys (Nongame Wildlife Report 3). Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission, Tallahassee
Travis J, Trexler JC, Mulvey M (1990) Multiple paternity and its
correlates in female Poecilia latipinna (Poeciliidae). Copeia
1990:722±729
Trexler JC, Travis J (1993) Nontraditional regression. Ecology
74:1629±1637
Trexler JC, Travis J, Trexler M (1990) Phenotypic plasticity in the
sail®n molly, Poecilia latipinna (Pisces: Poeciliidae). II. Laboratory experiment. Evolution 44:157±167
Weatherhead PJ, Boag PT (1995) Pair and extra-pair mating success relative to male quality in red-winged blackbirds. Behav
Ecol Sociobiol 37:81±91
Westneat DF (1993) Polygyny and extra-pair fertilizations in
eastern red-winged blackbirds (Agelaius phoeniceus). Behav
Ecol 4:49±60
Westneat DF, Sherman PW, Morton ML (1990) The ecology and
evolution of extra-pair copulations in birds. Curr Ornithol
7:331±369
Williams CJ, Evarts S (1989) The estimation of concurrent multiple
paternity probabilities in natural populations. Theor Popul Biol
35:90±112
Wiklund C, Forsberg J (1991) Sexual size dimorphism in relation to
female polygamy and protandry in butter¯ies: a comparative
study of Swedish Pieridae and Satyridae. Oikos 60:373±381
Winge O (1937) Succession of broods in Lebistes. Nature 140:467
Yezerinac SM, Weatherhead PJ, Boag PT (1995) Extra-pair paternity and the opportunity for sexual selection in a socially
monogamous bird (Dendroica petechia). Behav Ecol Sociobiol
37:179±188
Communicated by J.D. Reynolds