Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 619

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 137 of the 137 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Sperm competition and ejaculate economics

Parker, Geoff A., Pizzari, Tommaso·2010·Biological Reviews

Abstract

Sperm competition was identified in 1970 as a pervasive selective force in post‐copulatory sexual selection that occurs when the ejaculates of different males compete to fertilise a given set of ova. Since then, sperm competition has been much studied both empirically and theoretically. Because sperm competition often favours large ejaculates, an important challenge has been to understand the evolution of strategies through which males invest in sperm production and economise sperm allocation to maximise reproductive success under competitive conditions. Sperm competition mechanisms vary greatly, depending on many factors including the level of sperm competition, space constraints in the sperm competition arena, male mating roles, and female influences on sperm utilisation. Consequently, theoretical models of ejaculate economics are complex and varied, often with apparently conflicting predictions. The goal of this review is to synthesise the theoretical basis of ejaculate economics under sperm competition, aiming to provide empiricists with categorised model assumptions and predictions. We show that apparent contradictions between older and newer models can often be reconciled and there is considerable consensus in the predictions generated by different models. We also discuss qualitative empirical support for some of these predictions, and detail quantitative matches between predictions and observations that exist in the yellow dung fly. We argue that ejaculate economic theory represents a powerful heuristic to explain the diversity in ejaculate traits at multiple levels: across species, across males and within individual males. Future progress requires greater understanding of sperm competition mechanisms, quantification of trade‐offs between ejaculate allocation and numbers of matings gained, further knowledge of mechanisms of female sperm selection and their associated costs, further investigation of non‐sperm ejaculate effects, and theoretical integration of pre‐ and post‐copulatory episodes of sexual selection.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1469-185x.2010.00140.x

Cites

137 of 137 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 137 references

Cited by

See all 619

Metadata

Authors
Parker, G. A., & Pizzari, T.
Venue
Biological Reviews
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-06-16
Volume
85
Issue
4
Pages
897-934
ISSN
  • 0006-3231 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-7931
  • 1469-185X
OpenAlex
W2022137607
Cited by
619
References
137
FWCI
4.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Sperm competition and ejaculate economics. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1469-185x.2010.00140.x
The paper
Parker, G. A., & Pizzari, T. (2010). Sperm competition and ejaculate economics. Biological Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-185x.2010.00140.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.