1. Cell Biology
Download icon

Sperm Competition: Size isn't everything

  1. Ronald E Ellis  Is a corresponding author
  2. Qing Wei
  1. Rowan University School of Osteopathic Medicine, United States
  2. Rowan University Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, United States
Insight
  • Cited 1
  • Views 1,631
  • Annotations
Cite this article as: eLife 2015;4:e07604 doi: 10.7554/eLife.07604

Abstract

Male nematode worms may make larger sperm than hermaphrodite worms, but this is not the only reason that sperm from males have a competitive edge.

Main text

In his second major book, The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex, Charles Darwin showed that when animals compete for mates, sexual selection can drive many types of evolutionary change (Darwin, 1871). However, he did not notice that this competition continued even after animals had finished mating.

Sperm competition was only described a century later when groundbreaking work showed that if two (or more) males mate with a single female, their sperm compete for the chance to fertilize her egg cells or ‘oocytes’ (Parker, 1970). Since this process is carried out inside her reproductive tract, the female can influence the outcome, and the males can too, via chemicals released in their ejaculates. This competition can be lengthy and intense, particularly in animal species where females store sperm for later use.

The sperm of nematode worms resemble those of other animals in many ways, but they move by crawling rather than by swimming. The nematode Caenorhabditis elegans is ideal for studying sperm competition because its short lifespan and large brood size make the animals easy to work with in the laboratory. Furthermore, this worm's genetics have been well studied. Now, in eLife, Jody Hansen, Daniela Chavez and Gillian Stanfield—who are all at the University of Utah—have used the power of nematode genetics to transform our understanding of sperm competition (Hansen et al., 2015).

C. elegans has two sexes, males and hermaphrodites, both of which make sperm. Thus, several types of competitive interactions can be studied using these animals—the most important of which involves sperm from a male outcompeting sperm from a hermaphrodite to fertilize the hermaphrodite's own oocytes. A series of beautiful studies showed that the competitive advantage of male sperm can be explained, in part, because they are larger than hermaphrodite sperm (LaMunyon and Ward, 1995, 1998). Furthermore, comparisons between related species supported the idea that competition favored larger sperm in nematodes, and this model was confirmed by laboratory experiments (LaMunyon and Ward, 1999, 2002).

As a result, a simple model for how nematode sperm compete was proposed (Figure 1A; Ellis and Scharer, 2014). Inside a hermaphrodite, sperm are stored in the two structures called spermathecae and fight for positions near the maturing oocytes, where they will have the best chance of fertilization. Since each newly fertilized oocyte passes through the spermatheca, it dislodges many of the sperm, setting up a new round of competition to move into a good spot. Larger sperm appear to handle this intense competition better.

COMP-1 controls sperm competition in nematodes.

(A) When a normal male (outlined in blue) mates with a hermaphrodite (red), his sperm (blue) are larger than the hermaphrodite sperm (pink) and are better able to compete for positions in the two spermathecae (purple). Sperm located in the spermathecae are in a better position to fertilize the hermaphrodite's oocytes. Some sperm and a young embryo are shown in the uterus (brown), and the passage of an oocyte through the spermatheca on the right has dislodged the sperm. The region inside the dashed box is expanded in BD. (B) Male sperm can normally outcompete hermaphrodite sperm and enter the spermathecae (middle), but Hansen et al. show that comp-1 mutant male sperm (green) are outcompeted by hermaphrodite sperm (bottom). (C) Furthermore, although comp-1 sperm can fertilize female oocytes in the absence of competition (bottom), they cannot compete with normal male sperm (middle). (D) When both the male sperm (green) and hermaphrodite sperm (orange) are made by comp-1 mutants, the larger male sperm have a competitive advantage. This shows that the COMP-1 protein and sperm size independently affect competition.

Hansen, Chavez and Stanfield took advantage of the fact that male sperm normally outcompete the hermaphrodite's own sperm, and looked for rare males whose sperm could not compete with hermaphrodite sperm. This approach identified the gene, comp-1, which they named for its role in sperm competition.

Sperm from males with a mutation in comp-1 lose to those from normal hermaphrodites, even though they are larger (Figure 1B). And, the sperm from comp-1 mutant males also lose to sperm from normal males following a double mating (Figure 1C). Nevertheless, comp-1 mutant hermaphrodites can still self-fertilize, and comp-1 mutant males can fertilize ‘true females’ (hermaphrodites that are unable to make their own sperm). This indicates that the mutant sperm work fine in the absence of competition. Thus, comp-1 controls an aspect of sperm competition that is independent of size. This idea is supported by the fact that larger comp-1 mutant sperm (produced by comp-1 males) are still favored over smaller comp-1 mutant sperm (produced by comp-1 hermaphrodites) (Figure 1D).

Hansen, Chavez and Stanfield observed living worms and showed that comp-1 mutant sperm did not migrate to the two spermathecae as quickly as expected, and certain in vitro tests revealed that comp-1 sperm have shorter pseudopods (‘foot’-like projections that help cells to crawl). Since nematode sperm must crawl quickly towards the oocytes to compete, these defects suggest that the protein encoded by the comp-1 gene is involved in sperm movement or guidance.

In animals, oocytes often provide chemical cues to guide sperm migration. Indeed, nematode oocytes attract sperm by releasing a mixture of different hormone-like chemicals called ‘prostaglandins’ (Hoang et al., 2013). Thus, the COMP-1 protein might control the ability of sperm to sense compounds like these, or to respond to and move towards them. If so, studying COMP-1 should dramatically deepen our understanding of how the control of sperm movement influences sperm competition (Pizzari and Parker, 2009).

Whether COMP-1 is a general component of the machinery for sperm guidance or movement, or plays a direct role in making some sperm more competitive than others, remains unknown. However, the ability to use nematode genetics to solve these problems has opened up a vast new area for research, and placed C. elegans at the center of this critical field. Moreover, further genetic screens might identify additional players that control sperm competition.

References

  1. 1
    The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex
    1. C Darwin
    (1871)
    London: John Murray.
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. 9
  10. 10
    Sperm competition and sperm phenotype
    1. T Pizzari
    2. GA Parker
    (2009)
    In: TR Birkhead, DJ Hosken, S Pitnick, editors. Sperm biology: an evolutionary perspective. London: Academic Press. pp. 207–245.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Ronald E Ellis

    Department of Molecular Biology, Rowan University School of Osteopathic Medicine, Stratford, United States
    For correspondence
    ellisre@rowan.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Qing Wei

    Rowan University Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Stratford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Publication history

  1. Version of Record published: April 17, 2015 (version 1)

Copyright

© 2015, Ellis and Wei

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 1,631
    Page views
  • 135
    Downloads
  • 1
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, PubMed Central, Scopus.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Download citations (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Cell Biology
    Mikel Garcia-Marcos et al.
    Tools and Resources Updated

    Heterotrimeric G-proteins are signal transducers involved in mediating the action of many natural extracellular stimuli and many therapeutic agents. Non-invasive approaches to manipulate the activity of G-proteins with high precision are crucial to understand their regulation in space and time. Here, we developed LOV2GIVe, an engineered modular protein that allows the activation of heterotrimeric G-proteins with blue light. This optogenetic construct relies on a versatile design that differs from tools previously developed for similar purposes, that is metazoan opsins, which are light-activated G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Instead, LOV2GIVe consists of the fusion of a G-protein activating peptide derived from a non-GPCR regulator of G-proteins to a small plant protein domain, such that light uncages the G-protein activating module. Targeting LOV2GIVe to cell membranes allowed for light-dependent activation of Gi proteins in different experimental systems. In summary, LOV2GIVe expands the armamentarium and versatility of tools available to manipulate heterotrimeric G-protein activity.

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Plant Biology
    Madlen Stephani et al.
    Research Article Updated

    Eukaryotes have evolved various quality control mechanisms to promote proteostasis in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER). Selective removal of certain ER domains via autophagy (termed as ER-phagy) has emerged as a major quality control mechanism. However, the degree to which ER-phagy is employed by other branches of ER-quality control remains largely elusive. Here, we identify a cytosolic protein, C53, that is specifically recruited to autophagosomes during ER-stress, in both plant and mammalian cells. C53 interacts with ATG8 via a distinct binding epitope, featuring a shuffled ATG8 interacting motif (sAIM). C53 senses proteotoxic stress in the ER lumen by forming a tripartite receptor complex with the ER-associated ufmylation ligase UFL1 and its membrane adaptor DDRGK1. The C53/UFL1/DDRGK1 receptor complex is activated by stalled ribosomes and induces the degradation of internal or passenger proteins in the ER. Consistently, the C53 receptor complex and ufmylation mutants are highly susceptible to ER stress. Thus, C53 forms an ancient quality control pathway that bridges selective autophagy with ribosome-associated quality control in the ER.