Atypical functioning of female genitalia explains monandry in a butterfly

PeerJ. 2021 Nov 22:9:e12499. doi: 10.7717/peerj.12499. eCollection 2021.

Abstract

Monandrous species are rare in nature, especially in animals where males transfer nutrients to females in the ejaculate. The proximate mechanisms responsible for monandry are poorly studied. In butterflies and moths, the male transfers a nutritious spermatophore into the corpus bursae (CB) of the female. The CB is a multifunctional organ that digests the spermatophore and has partial control of the post-mating sexual receptivity of the female. The spermatophore distends the CB and the post-mating sexual receptivity of the female is inversely proportional to the degree of distension. The CB of many butterfly species has a muscular sheath whose contractions mechanically contribute to digest the spermatophore. As the contents of the CB are absorbed, the degree of distension decreases and the female recovers receptivity. We studied the monandrous butterfly Leptophobia aripa (Boisduval, 1836) (Pieridae) and found that females do not digest the spermatophores. We investigated the structure of the CB and found that a muscular sheath is absent, indicating that in this butterfly females lack the necessary "apparatus" for the mechanical digestion of the spermatophore. We propose that female monandry in this species is result of its incapability to mechanically digest the spermatophore, which results in a constant degree of CB distension after mating and, thus, in the maintenance of the sexually unreceptive state of females. Hypotheses on the evolution of this mechanism are discussed.

Keywords: Female genitalia; Lepidoptera; Mating frequency; Monandry; Sexual selection; Spermatophore.

Grants and funding

This research was supported by a grant from PAPIIT-DGAPA, UNAM (IN214120) to Carlos Cordero. David Xochipiltecatl García had a CONACYT scholarship during his graduate studies and his research in the University of Valencia, Spain, was supported by PAEP, UNAM. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.