title: Extreme sequential polyandry insures against nest failure in a frog.
abstract: Sequential polyandry may evolve as an insurance mechanism to reduce the risk of choosing a mate that is infertile, closely related, genetically inferior or incompatible, but polyandry also might insure against nest failure in unpredictable environments. Most animals are oviparous, and in species where males provide nest sites whose quality varies substantially and unpredictably, polyandrous females might insure offspring success by distributing their eggs across multiple nests. Here, we test this hypothesis in a wild population of an Australian terrestrial toadlet, a polyandrous species, where males construct nests and remain with broods. We found that females partitioned their eggs across the nests of two to eight males and that more polyandrous females gained a significant increase in mean offspring survivorship. Our results provide evidence for the most extreme case of sequential polyandry yet discovered in a vertebrate and also suggest that insurance against nest failure might favour the evolution of polyandry. We propose that insurance against nest failure might be widespread among oviparous taxa and provide an important explanation for the prevalence of sequential polyandry in nature.
authors.affiliation: School of Biological Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria 3800, Australia. phillip.byrne@sci.monash.edu.au
authors.forename: Phillip G
authors.initials: PG
authors.lastname: Byrne
authors.forename: J Scott
authors.initials: JS
authors.lastname: Keogh
mesh_terms: D000818:Animals; D001001:Anura / Q000235:genetics / Q000502:physiology*; D005260:Female; D008297:Male; D018895:Microsatellite Repeats; D009425:Nesting Behavior; D010063:Ovum / Q000254:growth & development / Q000502:physiology; D012726:Sexual Behavior, Animal
references.citation: Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2001 Aug;76(3):305-39
references.pmid: 11569787
references.citation: Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2000 Feb;75(1):21-64
references.pmid: 10740892
references.citation: Nature. 2006 Jan 12;439(7073):201-3
references.pmid: 16407952
references.citation: Proc Biol Sci. 2001 Dec 22;268(1485):2531-5
references.pmid: 11749706
references.citation: Mol Ecol. 2005 Jan;14(1):19-38
references.pmid: 15643948
references.citation: Proc Biol Sci. 1999 Oct 22;266(1433):2101-7
references.pmid: 10902545
references.citation: Nature. 2002 Jan 3;415(6867):71-3
references.pmid: 11780118
references.citation: Nature. 2002 Oct 10;419(6907):613-5
references.pmid: 12374978
references.citation: Nature. 2006 Nov 2;444(7115):89-92
references.pmid: 17080089
references.citation: Annu Rev Genet. 2002;36:19-45
references.pmid: 12429685
references.citation: Am Nat. 2001 Nov;158(5):519-29
references.pmid: 18707306
references.citation: Evolution. 2005 Jan;59(1):106-12
references.pmid: 15792231
references.citation: Proc Biol Sci. 2001 Jan 7;268(1462):87-93
references.pmid: 12123303
references.citation: Nature. 2003 Jan 23;421(6921):360-3
references.pmid: 12540898
references.citation: Anim Behav. 2000 Aug;60(2):145-164
references.pmid: 10973716
references.citation: Mol Ecol. 2000 Aug;9(8):1013-27
references.pmid: 10964221
references.citation: Nature. 1996 May 16;381(6579):232-4
references.pmid: 8622764