4.2 Article

Is Juvenile Hormone a potential mechanism that underlay the branched Y-model?

Journal

GENERAL AND COMPARATIVE ENDOCRINOLOGY
Volume 230, Issue -, Pages 170-176

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ygcen.2016.03.027

Keywords

Life-history; Sexual selection; Branched Y-model; Condition dependence; Sperm competition; Female choice

Funding

  1. CONACYT
  2. CONACYT [19660]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Trade-offs are a central tenet in the life-history evolution and the simplest model to understand it is the Y model: the investment of one arm will affect the investment of the other arm. However, this model is by far more complex, and a branched Y-model is proposed: trade-offs could exist within each arm of the Y, but the mechanistic link is unknown. Here we used Tenebrio molitor to test if Juvenile Hormone (JH) could be a mechanistic link behind the branched Y-model. Larvae were assigned to one of the following experimental groups: (1) low, (2) medium and (3) high doses of methoprene (a Juvenile Hormone analogue, JHa), (4) acetone (methoprene diluents; control one) or (5) naive (handled in the same way as other groups; control two). The JHa lengthened the time of development from larvae to pupae and larvae to adults, resulting in adults with a larger size. Males with medium and long JHa treatment doses were favored with female choice, but had smaller testes and fewer viable sperm. There were no differences between groups in regard to the number of spermatozoa of males, or the number of ovarioles or eggs of females. This results suggest that JH: (i) is a mechanistic link of insects branched Y model, (ii) is a double ended-sword because it may not only provide benefits on reproduction but could also impose costs, and (iii) has a differential effect on each sex, being males more affected than females. (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available