Cited by 218Animal Behavior and ReproductionEvolutionary Psychology and Human BehaviorEvolution and Genetic Dynamics

Harm to females increases with male body size in Drosophila melanogaster

Open access
Pitnick, Scott, García–González, Francisco·2002·Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences

Abstract

Previous studies indicate that female Drosophila melanogaster are harmed by their mates through copulation. Here, we demonstrate that the harm that males inflict upon females increases with male size. Specifically, both the lifespan and egg-production rate of females decreased significantly as an increasing function of the body size of their mates. Consequently, females mating with larger males had lower lifetime fitness. The detrimental effect of male size on female longevity was not mediated by male effects on female fecundity, egg-production rate or female-remating behaviour. Similarly, the influence of male size on female lifetime fecundity was independent of the male-size effect on female longevity. There was no relationship between female size and female resistance to male harm. Thus, although increasing male body size is known to enhance male mating success, it has a detrimental effect on the direct fitness of their mates. Our results indicate that this harm is a pleiotropic effect of some other selected function and not an adaptation. To the extent that females prefer to mate with larger males, this choice is harmful, a pattern that is consistent with the theory of sexually antagonistic coevolution.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1098/rspb.2002.2090

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Male harassment to secure extra matings may interfere with female oviposition or induce injury, such that increased exposure to males may be negatively associated with female lifetime fitness.

    “Male harassment to secure these extra matings may interfere with female oviposition or even induce injury (Pitnick and García-González  2002), such that increased exposure to males may be negatively associated with female lifetime fitness (Fowler and Partridge 1989; Morrow and Gage 2001).”

Authors
Pitnick, S., & García–González, F.
Affiliations
  • Syracuse University (US)
  • Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales (ES)
Corresponding author
Pitnick, Scott
Venue
Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences
Published
2002-09-07
Volume
269
Issue
1502
Pages
1821-1828
ISSN
  • 0080-4649 (ISSN-L)
  • 0962-8452
  • 1471-2954
OpenAlex
W2027912650
Cited by
218
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 9
FWCI
15.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Evolution and Genetic Dynamics
Keywords
Drosophila melanogaster, male size, female longevity, female fecundity, egg production rate, lifetime fitness, mating costs, sexual conflict, sexually antagonistic coevolution, mate choice, pleiotropy
MeSH terms
Animals, Body Constitution, Conflict, Psychological, Drosophila melanogaster, Fertility, Longevity, Male, Reproduction, Sexual Behavior, Animal

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review