Sex-investment ratios in ants: has female bias been systematically overestimated?
Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Standard
Sex-investment ratios in ants : has female bias been systematically overestimated? / Boomsma, J. J.
In: American Naturalist, Vol. 133, No. 4, 1989, p. 517-532.Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Sex-investment ratios in ants
T2 - has female bias been systematically overestimated?
AU - Boomsma, J. J.
PY - 1989
Y1 - 1989
N2 - The claim by Trivers and Hare (1976) and Nonacs (1986) that the ratio of sexual investment in monogynous ants is as much female-biased as 3:1 on the average is untenable because of 1) bias in the gyne-to-male dry-weight cost ratios, as a result of increasingly diverging rates of respiration and fat accumulation with increasing sexual dimorphism; and 2) bias in the numerical sex ratios estimated from small samples. Partial regressions of the numerical gyne-to-male sex ratio on the individual dry-weight ratio and sample size appeared to be consistently present in the data sets for monogynous and polygynous ants, although significantly so only for monogynous ants. These relationships were primarily interpreted as methodological artifacts, but possible biological explanations are also discussed. After adjustment for the assumed artifacts, the geometric-mean investment ratio across monogynous ants was estimated to be 1.82:1 in favor of gynes. -from Author
AB - The claim by Trivers and Hare (1976) and Nonacs (1986) that the ratio of sexual investment in monogynous ants is as much female-biased as 3:1 on the average is untenable because of 1) bias in the gyne-to-male dry-weight cost ratios, as a result of increasingly diverging rates of respiration and fat accumulation with increasing sexual dimorphism; and 2) bias in the numerical sex ratios estimated from small samples. Partial regressions of the numerical gyne-to-male sex ratio on the individual dry-weight ratio and sample size appeared to be consistently present in the data sets for monogynous and polygynous ants, although significantly so only for monogynous ants. These relationships were primarily interpreted as methodological artifacts, but possible biological explanations are also discussed. After adjustment for the assumed artifacts, the geometric-mean investment ratio across monogynous ants was estimated to be 1.82:1 in favor of gynes. -from Author
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0024927818&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1086/284933
DO - 10.1086/284933
M3 - Journal article
AN - SCOPUS:0024927818
VL - 133
SP - 517
EP - 532
JO - American Naturalist
JF - American Naturalist
SN - 0003-0147
IS - 4
ER -
ID: 379313119