Submit a preprint

54

Despite reproductive interference, the net outcome of reproductive interactions among spider mite species is not necessarily costlyuse asterix (*) to get italics
Salomé H. Clemente, Inês Santos, Rita Ponce, Leonor R. Rodrigues, Susana A. M. Varela and Sara MagalhãesPlease use the format "First name initials family name" as in "Marie S. Curie, Niels H. D. Bohr, Albert Einstein, John R. R. Tolkien, Donna T. Strickland"
2017
Reproductive interference is considered a strong ecological force, potentially leading to species exclusion. This supposes that the net effect of reproductive interactions is strongly negative for one of the species involved. Testing this requires a comprehensive analysis of interspecific reproductive interactions, accounting for the order and timing of mating events, and for their effects on either fertility or fecundity. To this aim, we measured reproductive interactions between a focal species, *Tetranychus urticae*, and an invasive (*T. evansi*) and a resident (*T. ludeni*) species, varying the mating sequence and interval, and measuring the effect of such crosses on fecundity and offspring sex ratio (a measure of fertility, as these species are haplodiploid). We found that mating with heterospecifics affected fecundity and sex ratio negatively, but also positively, depending on the species involved, and on the order and timing of mating events. Overall, the net effect of reproductive interactions was weak despite strong effects of particular events. In natural situations the outcome of reproductive interactions will thus hinge upon the frequency of each event.
You should fill this box only if you chose 'All or part of the results presented in this preprint are based on data'. URL must start with http:// or https://
You should fill this box only if you chose 'Scripts were used to obtain or analyze the results'. URL must start with http:// or https://
You should fill this box only if you chose 'Codes have been used in this study'. URL must start with http:// or https://
Sperm precedence, Tetranychus, reproductive interactions, mating, meta-analysis.
NonePlease indicate the methods that may require specialised expertise during the peer review process (use a comma to separate various required expertises).
Behavior & Social Evolution, Evolutionary Ecology, Species interactions
e.g. John Doe john@doe.com
No need for them to be recommenders of PCIEvolBiol. Please do not suggest reviewers for whom there might be a conflict of interest. Reviewers are not allowed to review preprints written by close colleagues (with whom they have published in the last four years, with whom they have received joint funding in the last four years, or with whom they are currently writing a manuscript, or submitting a grant proposal), or by family members, friends, or anyone for whom bias might affect the nature of the review - see the code of conduct
e.g. John Doe john@doe.com
2017-03-06 11:48:08
Vincent Calcagno