Memory of social experience affects female fecundity via perception of fly deposits.

BACKGROUND: Animals can exhibit remarkable reproductive plasticity in response to their social surroundings, with profound fitness consequences. The presence of same-sex conspecifics can signal current or future expected competition for resources or mates. Plastic responses to elevated sexual competition caused by exposure to same-sex individuals have been well-studied in males. However, much less is known about such plastic responses in females, whether this represents sexual or resource competition, or if it leads to changes in investment in mating behaviour and/or reproduction. Here, we used Drosophila melanogaster to measure the impact of experimentally varying female exposure to other females prior to mating on fecundity before and after mating. We then deployed physical and genetic methods to manipulate the perception of different social cues and sensory pathways and reveal the potential mechanisms involved. RESULTS: The results showed that females maintained in social isolation prior to mating were significantly more likely to retain unfertilised eggs before mating, but to show the opposite and lay significantly more fertilised eggs in the 24h after mating. More than 48h of exposure to other females was necessary for this social memory response to be expressed. Neither olfactory nor visual cues were involved in mediating fecundity plasticity-instead, the relevant cues were perceived through direct contact with the non-egg deposits left behind by other females. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate that females show reproductive plasticity in response to their social surroundings and can carry this memory of their social experience forward through mating. Comparisons of our results with previous work show that the nature of female plastic reproductive responses and the cues they use differ markedly from those of males. The results emphasise the deep divergence in how each sex realises its reproductive success.

Resource limitation and responses to rivals in males of the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster.

Diet has a profound direct and indirect effect on reproductive success in both sexes. Variation in diet quality and quantity can significantly alter the capacity of females to lay eggs and of males to deliver courtship. Here, we tested the effect of dietary resource limitation on the ability of male Drosophila melanogaster to respond adaptively to rivals by extending their mating duration. Previous work carried out under ad libitum diet conditions showed that males exposed to rivals prior to mating significantly extend mating duration, transfer more ejaculate proteins and achieve higher reproductive success. Such adaptive responses are predicted to occur because male ejaculate production may be limited. Hence, ejaculate resources require allocation across different reproductive bouts, to balance current vs. future reproductive success. However, when males suffer dietary limitation, and potentially have fewer reproductive resources to apportion, we expect adaptive allocation of responses to rivals to be minimized. We tested this prediction and found that males held on agar-only diets for 5-7 days lost the ability to extend mating following exposure to rivals. Interestingly, extended mating was retained in males held on low yeast/sugar: no sugar/yeast diet treatments, but was mostly lost when males were maintained on 'imbalanced' diets in which there was high yeast: no sugar and vice versa. Overall, the results show that males exhibit adaptive responses to rivals according to the degree of dietary resource limitation and to the ratio of individual diet components.

DDT resistance, epistasis and male fitness in flies.

In Drosophila melanogaster, the DDT resistance allele (DDT-R) is beneficial in the presence of DDT. Interestingly, DDT-R also elevates female fitness in the absence of DDT and existed in populations before DDT use. However, DDT-R did not spread regardless of DDT-independent selective advantages in females. We ask whether sexual antagonism could explain why DDT-R did not spread before pesticide use. We tested pre- and post-copulatory male fitness correlates in two genetic backgrounds into which we backcrossed the DDT-R allele. We found costs to DDT-R that depended on the genetic background in which DDT-R was found and documented strong epistasis between genetic background and DDT-R that influenced male size. Although it remains unclear whether DDT-R is generally sexually antagonistic, or whether the fitness costs noted would be sufficient to retard the spread of DDT-R in the absence of DDT, general fitness advantages to DDT-R in the absence of DDT may be unlikely.