Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 5 Re-mating behaviour

From: Experimental evolution under hyper-promiscuity in Drosophila melanogaster

Test Male typea Female typea Generation Risk ratio, SPR-:control (95 % CI) χ P
(a) Effects of SPR- deficiency in malesb SPR- or C WT N/A 0.6 (0.3, 1.3) 1.7 0.19
Experimental evolution of males, generation 16 SPR- or C WT 16 1.2 (0.8, 1.9) 0.9 0.35
Experimental evolution of males, generation 36b SPR- or C WT 36 1.4 (1.0, 1.8) 4.2 0.04
(b) Effects of SPR- deficiency in females WT SPR- or C N/A 1.4 (0.9, 2.3) 2.2 0.14
Experimental evolution of females WT SPR- or C 26 2.8 (2.0, 4.1) 30.6 <0.0001
(c) Effects of SPR- deficiency in within-treatment pairs SPR- or C SPR- or C N/A 2.6 (1.3, 5.1) 7.7 0.006
Experimental evolution in within-treatment pairs SPR- or C SPR- or C 26 2.3 (1.6, 3.3) 20.7 <0.0001
  1. aMales and females were SPR- or genetically matched controls (C), or wild-type (WT)
  2. bFull model details are given in Additional file 1: Table S4
  3. Effects of the SPR- deficiency itself in unselected flies, or experimental evolution in SPR- and control populations, on (a) experimental male ability to inhibit re-mating by wild-type females, or (b, c) experimental female propensity to re-mate with wild-type males following a mating with a (b) wild-type male or (c) experimental male of the same treatment group