Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31500699›Full record

ArticleeLife2019

Seminal fluid compromises visual perception in honeybee queens reducing their survival during additional mating flights.

Joanito Liberti, Julia Görner, Mat Welch, Ryan Dosselli, Morten Schiøtt, Yuri Ogawa, Ian Castleden, Jan M Hemmi, Barbara Baer-Imhoof, Jacobus J Boomsma and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in eLife, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Male seminal fluid allocation according to socio-sexual context in the South American fruit fly.Journal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Joanito LibertiCentre for Social Evolution, Department of Biology, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-4158-2591
Julia GörnerARC Centre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4026-9197
Mat WelchARC Centre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Australia.
Ryan DosselliARC Centre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6524-5138
Morten SchiøttCentre for Social Evolution, Department of Biology, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-4309-8090
Yuri OgawaSchool of Animal Biology and UWA Oceans Institute, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Australia.
Ian CastledenARC Centre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Australia.
Jan M HemmiSchool of Animal Biology and UWA Oceans Institute, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4629-9362
Barbara Baer-ImhoofCentre for Integrative Bee Research (CIBER), Department of Entomology, University of California, Riverside, Riverside, United States.
Jacobus J BoomsmaCentre for Social Evolution, Department of Biology, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-3598-1609
Boris BaerCentre for Integrative Bee Research (CIBER), Department of Entomology, University of California, Riverside, Riverside, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-1136-5967

Funding

Australian Research Council DP130100087Australian Research Council Future Fellowship FT110100105Australian Research Council Future Fellowship FT110100528Australian Research Council LP100100438Australian Research Council LP130100029European Research Council Advanced Grant 323085University of California, Riverside Faculty start up fund
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Queens of social insects make all mate-choice decisions on a single day, except in honeybees whose queens can conduct mating flights for several days even when already inseminated by a number of drones. Honeybees therefore appear to have a unique, evolutionarily derived form of sexual conflict: a queen's decision to pursue risky additional mating flights is driven by later-life fitness gains from genetically more diverse worker-offspring but reduces paternity shares of the drones she already mated with. We used artificial insemination, RNA-sequencing and electroretinography to show that seminal fluid induces a decline in queen vision by perturbing the phototransduction pathway within 24-48 hr. Follow up field trials revealed that queens receiving seminal fluid flew two days earlier than sister queens inseminated with saline, and failed more often to return. These findings are consistent with seminal fluid components manipulating queen eyesight to reduce queen promiscuity across mating flights.

Indexed as

Flight, AnimalSexual Behavior, AnimalSurvivalAnimalsBeesBiological FactorsElectroretinographySemenSequence Analysis, RNAVision, OcularBiological FactorsApis melliferaartificial inseminationecologyevolutionary biologyneurotranscriptomicsRNA-sequencingsexual conflictsocial insects

Identifiers

PMID31500699
PMCPMC6739865

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.