Skip to main content

Table 3 Relation between sperm functional traits and sperm design

From: Is sperm morphology functionally related to sperm swimming ability? A case study in a wild passerine bird with male hierarchies

 

Before social status manipulation

After social status manipulation

Fixed effects

VCL

Proportion of motile sperm

VCL

Proportion of motile sperm

Slope ± SD

F (df1,df2)

p

Slope ± SD

F (df1,df2)

p

Slope ± SD

F (df1,df2)

p

Slope ± SD

F (df1,df2)

p

Intercept

−29.64 ± 72.88

  

−4.79 ± 4.24

  

79.4 ± 73.83

  

−3.92 ± 4.28

  

Social rank

 

3.13 (3,36)

0.037

 

5.62 (3,36.1)

0.003

 

1.08 (3,34.9)

0.37

 

0.89 (3,35.5)

0.45

 Subordinate 1

9.91 ± 5.56

  

0.94 ± 0.32

  

9.43 ± 6.15

  

0.59 ± 0.37

  

 Subordinate 2

14.94 ± 5.84

  

0.89 ± 0.34

  

−0.48 ± 6.12

  

0.32 ± 0.36

  

 Subordinate 3

8.96 ± 5.46

  

0.14 ± 0.32

  

2.03 ± 6.13

  

0.08 ± 0.37

  

Sperm design

0.81 ± 1.33

0.7 (1,42.2)

0.41

−0.07 ± 0.08

2.87 (1,42.9)

0.1

0.37 ± 1.46

0.40 (1,47.9)

0.53

−0.08 ± 0.08

0.001 (1,44.5)

0.99

Time

−0.37 ± 0.03

563.62 (1287)

> 0.001

− 0.02 ± 0.001

367.22 (1287)

> 0.001

−0.36 ± 0.03

617.62 (1282)

> 0.001

−0.009 ± 0.001

238.64 (1282)

< 0.001

Body mass

2.86 ± 1.83

2.36 (1,43.4)

0.13

0.09 ± 0.11

0.76 (1,44.2)

0.39

2.59 ± 1.83

1.92 (1,43.2)

0.17

0.01 ± 0.11

0.01 (1,46.9)

0.92

Tarsus length

0.98 ± 3.23

0.09 (1,45.5)

0.77

0.16 ± 0.19

0.66 (1,46.2)

0.42

−3.85 ± 3.63

1.10 (1,38)

0.30

0.22 ± 0.21

1.05 (1,41.1)

0.31

Social rank x Sperm design

 

1.06 (3,46.1)

0.37

 

3.09 (3,46.7)

0.036

 

1.03 (3,43)

0.39

 

1.46 (3,46)

0.24

 Subordinate 1

−1.24 ± 1.97

  

−0.05 ± 0.11

  

−2.11 ± 2.03

  

0.02 ± 0.12

  

 Subordinate 2

−2.9 ± 1.92

  

0.12 ± 0.11

  

1.59 ± 2.02

  

0.17 ± 0.12

  

 Subordinate 3

1.5 ± 1.68

  

0.24 ± 0.10

  

−1.6 ± 2.28

  

0.20 ± 0.13

  

Social rank x Time

 

0.99 (3287)

0.4

 

8.83 (3287)

> 0.001

 

1.34 (3282)

0.26

 

1.73 (3282)

0.16

 Subordinate 1

0.06 ± 0.04

  

0.005 ± 0.002

  

0.01 ± 0.04

  

−0.002 ± 0.002

  

 Subordinate 2

0.001 ± 0.04

  

0.005 ± 0.002

  

0.06 ± 0.04

  

−0.004 ± 0.002

  

 Subordinate 3

0.02 ± 0.04

  

0.01 ± 0.002

  

0.06 ± 0.04

  

−6.0 E-4 ± 0.002

  

Sperm design x Time

−0.01 ± 0.01

0.06 (1287)

0.81

 

1.83 (1287)

0.18

0 ± 0.01

5.78 (1282)

0.017

−2.7 E-4 ± 4.3 E-4

0.56 (1282)

0.45

Social rank x Sperm design x Time

 

4.34 (3287)

0.005

8.2 E-5 ± 4.8 E-4

2.4 (3287)

0.07

 

1.74 (3282)

0.16

 

1.55 (3282)

0.20

 Subordinate 1

0.02 ± 0.01

  

0.001 ± 7.1 E-4

  

−0.01 ± 0.01

  

−2.5 E-5 ± 6.2 E-4

  

 Subordinate 2

0.04 ± 0.01

  

−3.5 E-5 ± 6.8 E-4

  

−0.02 ± 0.01

  

7.9 E-4 ± 6.0 E-4

  

 Subordinate 3

0.001 ± 0.01

  

7.1 E-5 ± 6.0 E-4

  

0 ± 0.01

  

−5.1 E-4 ± 6.4 E-4

  
  1. Estimates from linear mixed models, and F and p values from ANOVAs with Kenward-Roger approxi-mation to the degrees of freedom. Contrast are done against the dominant males. Bold p-values are significant (alpha = 0.05)