» Articles » PMID: 31432247

Ecophysiological Determinants of Sexual Size Dimorphism: Integrating Growth Trajectories, Environmental Conditions, and Metabolic Rates

Overview
Journal Oecologia
Date 2019 Aug 22
PMID 31432247
Citations 4
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Sexual size dimorphism (SSD) often results in dramatic differences in body size between females and males. Despite its ecological importance, little is known about the relationship between developmental, physiological, and energetic mechanisms underlying SSD. We take an integrative approach to understand the relationship between developmental trajectories, metabolism, and environmental conditions resulting in extreme female-biased SSD in the crab spider Mecaphesa celer (Thomisidae). We tested for sexual differences in growth trajectories, as well as in the energetics of growth, hypothesizing that female M. celer have lower metabolic rates than males or higher energy assimilation. We also hypothesized that the environment in which spiderlings develop influences the degree of SSD of a population. We tracked growth and resting metabolic rates of female and male spiderlings throughout their ontogeny and quantified the adult size of individuals raised in a combination of two diet and two temperature treatments. We show that M. celer's SSD results from differences in the shape of female and male growth trajectories. While female and male resting metabolic rates did not differ, diet, temperature, and their interaction influenced body size through an interactive effect with sex, with females being more sensitive to the environment than males. We demonstrate that the shape of the growth curve is an important but often overlooked determinant of SSD and that females may achieve larger sizes through a combination of high food ingestion and low activity levels. Our results highlight the need for new models of SSD based on ontogeny, ecology, and behavior.

Citing Articles

Sex-biased phenotypic plasticity affects sexual dimorphism patterns under changing environmental conditions.

Cordeschi G, Canestrelli D, Porretta D Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):892.

PMID: 38195624 PMC: 10776787. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-51204-6.


Size rather than complexity of sexual ornaments prolongs male metamorphosis and explains sexual size dimorphism in sepsid flies.

Rajaratnam G, Lui G, Su K, Chew M, Ang Y, Puniamoorthy N Proc Biol Sci. 2023; 290(1998):20222531.

PMID: 37132233 PMC: 10154940. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2022.2531.


Limited sex differences in plastic responses suggest evolutionary conservatism of thermal reaction norms: A meta-analysis in insects.

Teder T, Taits K, Kaasik A, Tammaru T Evol Lett. 2022; 6(6):394-411.

PMID: 36579171 PMC: 9783480. DOI: 10.1002/evl3.299.


Modest sexual size dimorphism and allometric growth: a study based on growth and gonad development in the wolf spider Pardosa pseudoannulata (Araneae: Lycosidae).

Zhang F, Chen X, Zeng C, Wen L, Zhao Y, Peng Y Biol Open. 2021; 10(12).

PMID: 34889957 PMC: 8679722. DOI: 10.1242/bio.058771.

References
1.
Tenhumberg B, Tyre A, Roitberg B . Stochastic variation in food availability influences weight and age at maturity. J Theor Biol. 2000; 202(4):257-72. DOI: 10.1006/jtbi.1999.1049. View

2.
Preziosi R, Fairbairn D . Lifetime selection on adult body size and components of body size in a waterstrider: opposing selection and maintenance of sexual size dimorphism. Evolution. 2000; 54(2):558-66. DOI: 10.1554/0014-3820(2000)054[0558:LSOABS]2.0.CO;2. View

3.
Blanckenhorn W . The evolution of body size: what keeps organisms small?. Q Rev Biol. 2000; 75(4):385-407. DOI: 10.1086/393620. View

4.
Gillooly J, Brown J, WEST G, Savage V, Charnov E . Effects of size and temperature on metabolic rate. Science. 2001; 293(5538):2248-51. DOI: 10.1126/science.1061967. View

5.
WEST G, Brown J, Enquist B . A general model for ontogenetic growth. Nature. 2001; 413(6856):628-31. DOI: 10.1038/35098076. View