Supplemental Data
Polyandrous females benefit by producing sons that
achieve high reproductive success in a competitive
environment
Renée C. Firman
Files in this Data Supplement:
Figure S1 – A schematic representation of the design of the free-ranging mouse
enclosures
Plate S1 – The design of the free-ranging mouse enclosures
Table S1 – Mean body weights of founding monogamous and polygamous individuals
Table S2 – Mean body weights of the males and females for each age cohort across the
four enclosures
Table S3 – Descriptive statistics of room temperatures recorded for each enclosure over
the 11 weeks of the experiment
Table S4 – Separate Pearson’s 2 analyses for the in utero and free-living offspring
Figure S2 – The proportion of offspring sired by males from the three polygamous and
three monogamous selection lines of house mice
Figure S1. A schematic representation of the design of the mouse enclosures. Each
enclosure was constructed by adhering aluminium barriers to the walls of rooms within
an animal care unit. The floors were covered with sand. Wooden paneling and plastic
piping (P) were used to create subsections. Wooden boxes (N) and hay were provided for
nesting, and egg cartons (E) were used as temporary shelters. Food (F) and water (W)
was provided ad libitum.
Figure S2. The proportion of offspring sired by males from the polygamous and
monogamous selection lines of house mice. A generalized linear model with a logit link
function and a binomial error distribution revealed that there were differences among the
lines (F8, 15 = 3.457, P = 0.023).
Plate S1. The design of the mouse enclosures.
Table S1. Mean (± se) body weights of founding monogamous and polygamous
individuals on the day of release.
Monogamous
Polygamous
Monogamous
Polygamous
females
females
males
males
A
19.71 ± 0.77
20.55 ± 0.32
23.86 ± 1.08
22.30 ± 0.23
B
19.37 ± 0.61
20.50 ± 1.31
23.02 ± 1.41
22.98 ± 2.39
C
17.51 ± 0.12
20.96 ± 0.92
25.95 ± 2.08
22.43 ± 1.15
D
20.47 ± 0.41
17.90 ± 0.18
25.34 ± 1.08
24.47 ± 2.14
Enclosure
Table S2. Mean (± se) body weights of the males and females for each age cohort across the four enclosures at the end of the
experiment.
Juveniles
Sub-adults
Adults
Founders
Pups
Enclosure
Male
Female
Male
Female
Male
Female
Male
Female
A
2.1 ± 0.1
7.0
8.6 ± 0.3
13.7 ± 0.4
12.8 ± 0.3
18.9 ± 1.9
18.3 ± 1.3
28.9 ± 0.4
30.0 ± 1.7
B
1.5 ± 0.1
6.1 ± 0.3
6.5 ± 0.2
12.6 ± 0.4
12.5 ± 0.4
20.1 ± 0.6
19.4 ± 1.1
25.9 ± 3.1
30.6 ± 1.4
C
–
7.9 ± 0.4
6.2 ± 0.6
12.4
15.2 ± 0.6
17.6 ± 1.0
16.1 ± 0.4
31.0 ± 1.1
29.7 ± 0.6
D
2.6 ± 0.2
7.5 ± 0.3
7.8 ± 0.4
14.5 ± 0.3
15.3 ± 0.6
–
–
30.4 ± 0.7
30.5 ± 1.8
Mean
2.1 ± 0.1
7.0 ± 0.2
7.3 ± 0.3
13.4 ± 0.3
13.8 ± 0.4
18.8 ± 0.6
18.0 ± 0.6
29.2 ± 0.8
30.1 ± 0.7
Table S3. Descriptive statistics of room temperatures (C) recorded for each enclosure
over the 11 weeks of the experiment.
1
Enclosure
Average min.1
Average max.2
Lowest min.
Highest max.
A
15.42 ± 0.16
17.59 ± 0.15a, b
12.8
20.2
B
15.33 ± 0.16
17.77 ± 0.17a
12.8
24.1
C
15.44 ± 0.15
16.99 ± 0.13c
13.0
19.4
D
15.62 ± 0.15
17.13 ± 0.14b, c
13.3
20.0
No difference across rooms for the duration of the experiment (ANOVA: F3, 301 = 0.616,
P = 0.605)
2
Differed across rooms through the duration of the experiment (ANOVA: F3, 302 = 6.711,
P < 0.001). The different levels of significance were determined by a post-hoc Tukey
test, and are represented by the superscripted letters.
Table S4. Separate Pearson’s 2 analyses for the in utero and free-living offspring, with
the expectation of random mating and equal male reproductive success. The weighted Zmethod for combining probabilities was applied to test whether there was an overall
effect of selection history on male reproductive success (see text). The proportion of
offspring sired by the monogamous (PM) and polygamous (PP) males is given.
df
N
PM
PP
2
p
z
A
1
14
0.00
1.00
14.000
<0.001
3.564
B
1
26
0.73
0.27
5.538
0.019
2.083
C
1
29
0.48
0.52
0.034
0.854
1.052
D
1
32
0.19
0.71
12.500
<0.001
3.348
A
1
49
0.33
0.67
5.898
0.015
2.166
B
1
52
0.02
0.98
50.000
<0.001
6.000
C
1
37
0.46
0.54
0.243
0.622
0.311
D
1
31
0.06
0.94
23.516
<0.001
4.710
Offspring type
Enclosure
In utero
Free-living