[1].[J].Asian Herpetological Research,2015,6(4):298-304.[doi:10.16373/j.cnki.ahr.150025]
 Yingying QI,Wei ZHANG,Li HUANG,et al.Significant Male Biased Sexual Size Dimorphism in Leptobrachium leishanensis[J].Asian Herpetological Research(AHR),2015,6(4):298-304.[doi:10.16373/j.cnki.ahr.150025]


Asian Herpetological Research[ISSN:2095-0357/CN:51-1735/Q]

Original Article


Significant Male Biased Sexual Size Dimorphism in Leptobrachium leishanensis
Yingying QI Wei ZHANG Li HUANG Zhenhua LUO Mian ZHAO and Hua WU*
Institute of Evolution and Ecology, International Research Centre of Ecology and Environment, School of Life Sciences, Central China Normal University, Wuhan 430079, Hubei, China
Sexual size dimorphism Leptobrachium leishanensis mating system parental care evolution
Sexual size dimorphism (SSD) is a widespread phenomenon among animals, and whose evolution and maintenance has been a central topic in evolutionary biology since Darwin’s time. SSD varies in direction among the major taxonomic groups of animals and even within the same groups. In anurans, female biased SSD is the rule in many lineages, whereas male biased SSD is a rare phenomenon. In this paper, we analyze whether SSD exists in Leptobrachium leishanensis by comparing morphological characteristics between the sexes. Our results show that all six morphological characteristics measured are significantly different between the sexes. Males are significantly larger than females, indicating that the male biased SSD of this species is apparent. The size of the nuptial spines, a special secondary sex trait of males, is significantly and positively correlated with body size. We suggest that the resource defense polygyny mating system and parental care behavior may be explanations for the evolution of male biased SSD and nuptial spine development in this species.


Abouheif E., Fairbairn D. J. 1997. A comparative analysis of allometry for sexual size dimorphism: Assessing Rensch’s rule. Am Nat, 149(3): 540–562
Andersson M. 1994. Sexual selection. Princeton, New Jersey, USA: Princeton University Press
Berry J. F., Shine R. 1980. Sexual dimorphism and sexual selection in turtles (order Testudines). Oecologia, 44(2): 185–191
Blanckenhorn W. U. 2005. Behavioral causes and consequences of sexual size dimorphism. Ethology, 111(11): 977–1016
Bolnick D. I., Doebeli M. 2003. Sexual dimorphism and sympatric speciation: Two sides of the same ecological coin. Evolution, 57(11): 2433–2449
Butler M. A., Sawyer S. M., Losos J. B. 2007. Sexual dimorphism and adaptive radiation in Anolis lizards. Nature, 447(7141): 202–205
Butler M. A., Schoener T. W., Losos J. B. 2000. The relationship between sexual size dimorphism and habitat use in Greater Antillean Anolis lizards. Evolution, 54(1): 259–272
Cameron M. H., He X., Fu J. 2011. Keratinized nuptial spines are used for male combat in the Emei moustache toad (Leptobrachium boringii). Asian Herpetol Res, 2(3): 142–148
Clutton-Brock T. H. 1982. The functions of antlers. Behaviour, 79(2): 108–125
Cox R. M., Skelly S. L., John-Alder H. B. 2003. A comparative test of adaptive hypotheses for sexual size dimorphism in lizards. Evolution, 57(7): 1653–1669
Crook J. H. 1972. Sexual selection, dimorphism, and social organization in the primates. In Campbell R. (Ed.), Sexual selection and the descent of man. Chicago, IL, USA: Aldine, 231–281
Darwin C. 1871. The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex. London, UK: John Murray
Emlen S. T., Oring L. W. 1977. Ecology, sexual selection, and the evolution of mating systems. Science, 197(4300): 215–223
Fairbairn D. J. 1997. Allometry for sexual size dimorphism: pattern and process in the coevolution of body size in males and females. Annu Rev Ecol Syst, 28: 659–687
Fairbairn D. J., Blanckenhorn W. U., Szekely T. 2007. Sex, size, and gender roles: Evolutionary studies of sexual size dimorphism. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press
Fairbairn D. J., Preziosi R. F. 1994. Sexual selection and the evolution of allometry for sexual size dimorphism in the water strider, Aquarius remigis. Am Nat, 144(1): 101–118
Fairbairn D. J., Shine R. 1993. Patterns of sexual size dimorphism in seabirds of the southern hemisphere. Oikos, 68(1): 139–145
Han X., Fu J. 2013. Dose life history shape sexual size dimorphism in anurans? A comparative analysis. BMC Evol Biol, 13(1): 27
Herrel A., Spithoven L., Van Damme R., De Vree F. 1999. Sexual dimorphism of head size in Gallotia galloti: Testing the niche divergence hypothesis by functional analyses. Funct Ecol, 13(3): 289–297
Hudson C. M., Fu J. 2013. Male-biased sexual size dimorphism, resource defense polygyny, and multiple paternity in the Emei moustache toad (Leptobrachium boringii). PLoS ONE, 8(6): e67502
Hudson C. M., He X., Fu J. 2011. Keratinized nuptial spines are used for male combat in the Emei moustache toad (Leptobrachium boringii). Asian Herpetol Res, 2(3): 142–148
Johnstone R. A., Reynolds J. D., Deutsch J. C. 1996. Mutual mate choice and sex differences in choosiness. Evolution, 50(4): 1382–1391
Katsikaros K., Shine R. 1997. Sexual dimorphism in the tusked frog, Adelotus brevis (Anura: Myobatrachidae): The roles of natural and sexual selection. Biol J Linn Soc, 60(1): 39–51
Kluge A. G. 1981. The life history, social organization, and parental behaviour of Hylarosenbergi Boulenger, a nest-building gladiator frog. Misc Publ Mus Zool Univ Mich, 160(1): 1–170
Liu C., Hu S. 1961. Tailless amphibians of China. Beijing, China: Science Press
McDiarmid R. W. 1978. The evolution of parental care in frogs. In Burghardt G. M., Bekoff M. (Eds.), The development of behavior: comparative and evolutionary aspects. Enfield, UK: Science Publisher, 127–147
Monnet J. M., Cherry M. I. 2002. Sexual size dimorphism in anurans. P Roy Soc B: Biol Sci, 269(1507): 2301–2307
Moore S. L., Wilson K. 2002. Parasites as a viability cost of sexual selection in natural populations of mammals. Science, 297(5589): 2015–2018
Nie Y., Swaisgood R. R., Zhang Z., Hu Y., Ma Y., Wei F. 2012. Giant panda scent-marking strategies in the wild: Role of season, sex and marking surface. Anim Behav, 84(1): 39–44
Parker G. A. 1992. The evolution of sexual size dimorphism in fish. J Fish Biol, 41(sB): 1–20
Preest M. R. 1994. Sexual size dimorphism and feeding energetics in the lizard Anolis carolinensis: Why do female take smaller prey then males? J Herpetol, 28(3): 292–298
Rao D., Wilkinson J. A. 2008. Phylogenetic relationships of the mustache toads inferred from mtDNA sequences. Mol Phylogenet Evol, 46(1): 61–73
Reading C. J. 2001. Non-random pairing with respect to past breeding experience in the common toad (Bufo bufo). J Zool, 255(4): 511–518
Selander R. K. 1972. Sexual selection and dimorphism in birds. In Campbell B. (Ed.), Sexual selection and the descent of man. Chicago, IL, USA: Aldine, 180–230
Semlitsch R. D. 1994. Evolutionary consequences of non-random mating: Do large males increase offspring fitness in the anuran Bufo bufo. Behav Ecol Sociobiol, 34(1): 19–24
Schauble C. S. 2004. Variation in body size and sexual dimorphism across geographical and environmental space in the frogs Limnodynastes tasmaniensis and L. peronii. Biol J Linn Soc, 82(1): 39–56
Shine R. 1979. Sexual selection and sexual dimorphism in the Amphibia. Copeia, 1979(2): 297–306
Shine R. 1991. Intersexual dietary divergence and the evolution of sexual dimorphism in snakes. Am Nat, 138(1): 103–122
Short R. V., Balaban E. 1994. The differences between sexes. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press
Smith D. C. 1987. Adult recruitment in chorus frogs: Effects of size and date at metamorphosis. Ecology, 68(2): 344–350
Temeles E. J. 1985. Sexual size dimorphism of bird-eating hawks: The effect of prey vulnerability. Am Nat, 125(4): 485–499
Trivers R. L. 1971. Parental investment and sexual selection. In Campbll B. (Ed.). Sexual selection and the descent of man. Chicago, IL, USA: Aldine, 1871–1971
Tsuji H., Matsui M. 2002. Male-male combat and head morphology in a fanged frog (Rana kuhlii) from Taiwan. J Herpetol, 36(3): 520–526
Weatherhead P. J. 1980. Sexual dimorphism in two savannah sparrow populations. Can J Zool, 58(3): 412–415
Wells K.D. 2007. The ecology and behavior of amphibians. Chicago, IL, USA: University of Chicago Press
Wiklund C., Karlsson B. 1988. Sexual size dimorphism in relationto fecundity in some Swedish Satyrid butterflies. Am Nat, 131(1): 132–138
Zhang W., Luo Z., Zhao M., Wu H. 2015. High genetic diversity in the endangered and narrowly distributed amphibian species Leptobrachium leishanensis. Integr Zool, 10(5): 465–481
Zheng Y., Deng D., Li S., Fu J. 2010. Aspects of the breeding biology of the Omei mustache toad (Leptobrachium boringii): Polygamy and paternal care. Amphibia-Reptilia, 31(2): 183–194
Zheng Y., Li S., Fu J. 2008. A phylogenetic analysis of frog genera Vibrissaphora and Leptobrachium and the correlated evolution of nuptial spine and reversed sexual size dimorphism. Mol Phylogenet Evol, 46(2): 695–707

更新日期/Last Update: 2016-01-25