4.6 Article

The Mating Pattern of Captive Naked Mole-Rats Is Best Described by a Monogamy Model

期刊

FRONTIERS IN ECOLOGY AND EVOLUTION
卷 10, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fevo.2022.855688

关键词

naked mole-rat; cooperative breeding; monogamy; polyandry; kinship analysis; microsatellite marker

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Naked mole-rats primarily exhibit monogamous mating behavior, contrary to previous belief of polyandry. This finding supports the theory of cooperative breeding and kin selection in other mammalian species.
Naked mole-rats form colonies with a single reproductively active female surrounded by subordinate workers. Workers perform offspring care, construction and defense of the burrow system, and food supply. Such division of labor, called cooperative breeding, is strongly associated with the evolution of monogamous mating behavior, as seen in several mammalian lineages. This association is explained by the evolutionary theory of kin selection, according to which a subordinate adult may help to raise other's offspring if they are in full sibling relationship. In conflict with this theory, the naked mole-rat is widely considered to be polyandrous, based on reports on multiple males contributing to a colony's progeny. In order to resolve this contrast, we undertook an in-depth microsatellite-based kinship analysis on captive colonies. Four independent colonies comprising a total of 265 animals were genotyped using a panel of 73 newly established microsatellite markers. Our results show that each mole-rat colony contains a single monogamous breeder pair, which translates to a reproductive skew of 100% for both sexes. This finding, also in conjunction with previously published parental data, favors monogamy as the best-fitting model to describe naked mole-rat reproduction patterns. Polyandry or other polygamous reproduction models are disfavored and should be considered as exceptional. Overall, the empirical genetic data are in agreement with the kin selection theory.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据