1 Female + 2 Males = ?

This has been on my mind for a long time, so it's time I get some thoughts and opinions. If you bred a female with 2 different males at different times while she is receptive, would you get babies from each Sire in the same clutch?
With Ball Pythons, if a female is bred with 2 different males, you could end up with 50% offspring from one Sire and 50% offspring from the other Sire in the same clutch.

Any thoughts, facts or experiences with this?

I can't believe that nobody else is interested to hear about this topic...

im interested, but cant offer any info.

That is a good question. I have never heard of it but would love to hear if anyone has had any success with this.

I'm sure that you would get a mix of offspring.
That is why I am glad Agnes waited so long before she became receptive to Kitty .. didn't want to question whether or not all the babies were his.
I don't really buy into the whole "retained sperm" theory ... I am more inclined to believe that Kent is closer to the truth with his ideas on the subject.
However, If a female had two partners in the same period of receptivity ... I don't know how you could not have babies from 2 fathers in the same clutch.
My questions would be ... why would you want to do this ? and How would you be able to separate who belonged to who?

-Brad

Brad Ramsey said:

I'm sure that you would get a mix of offspring.
That is why I am glad Agnes waited so long before she became receptive to Kitty .. didn't want to question whether or not all the babies were his.
I don't really buy into the whole "retained sperm" theory ... I am more inclined to believe that Kent is closer to the truth with his ideas on the subject.
However, If a female had two partners in the same period of receptivity ... I don't know how you could not have babies from 2 fathers in the same clutch.
My questions would be ... why would you want to do this ? and How would you be able to separate who belonged to who?

-Brad

Click to expand...

That's exactly the reason that I have brought it up. If females retain sperm, and you mated her to a different Sire then her previous clutch, who's to say that all the babies are actually from father #2? This could be a large reason why there are variations within a clutch...

You can always have them on the Maury Povich show and he will tell the female who the baby daddy is lol

redlupin said:

You can always have them on the Maury Povich show and he will tell the female who the baby daddy is lol

Click to expand...

Don't joke. There was a court case that made the papers here recently where a woman was claiming maintenance for her triplets from a guy, and DNA testing confirmed that only 1 of the children was his - the other two were fathered by another man. So if it can happen to humans, I'm almost sure it's happening with chams...

Again, I don't believe sperm can be retained.
I would feel confident that all the young were of one male unless another male mated with the female during that receptive window.
If she mated with a different male 3 or 4 months ago, I do not believe any of the eggs would be fertilized by that sperm.
The theory that I think is far more viable is that eggs that are not in the current cycle may get fertilized and subsequently laid in a second clutch. If this is true than the female is not retaining sperm .. but rather she is retaining fertilized eggs that are not yet developed.
There has been no scientific study (that I am aware of) that proves conclusively that females have an ability to store or retain sperm.
All we know is that in a second clutch there can be viable eggs without a second mating having occurred. But not always ... and never 100% viable.

-Brad

yeah ive heard females retain too so im guessin anything not mated with the original is probally a cross..cuz the egss could be verry easily contaminaded if they do actually retain sperm... im curiousd to know if anyone knows 100% about these facts ............

Yeah, that seems like quite a logical theory to me Brad. If she were retaining sperm, you'd expect that even in a very small quantity of retained sperm there would be enough sperm to fertilise the entire 2nd clutch. Yet since you say that the second clutch is never 100% viable, it makes sense that the ones that ARE viable are simply left-over fertilised eggs from the previous clutch, and that the fertilisation process doesn't actually recur.

And as for the prospect of multiple fathers, the theory about multiple matings during the receptive period seems most likely. That's certainly how it worked in the human case I mentioned. According to the Sunday Times of 18 May 2008, "known as superfecundation, the phenomenon of twins or triplets having different fathers can occur when a woman, having ovulated at least twice in the same cycle, sleeps with more than one man within 24 hours and conceives children by them."
In the case of chameleons, this scenario is quite possible since the female produces multiple eggs in the same cycle. I wonder what the window for fertilisation of those eggs is (presumable longer than the 24 hours cited for humans)?

First off... Thanks Vibrant!! I think this is an excelent question that should definately be researched and discussed in more depth. Thanks for asking!

and Thanks to Brad,

It has been on my list of "stuff I would like to do when I find time" to look into further the Theory of retained sperm... and I think it would make a lot of sense to say that they are reatining fertilized eggs instead of sperm, Only thing that comes to mind... Is that if the female was carrying fertilized eggs between clutches she would not become receptive at all between clutches... But often times the female will have another go between clutches. I could understand if maybe the female instinctually lets it happen to make sure the next clutch is nice and fertile. But seeing how fast Fems turn unreceptive once incimanted leads to me to think that if there were any fertile eggs present that she would show Gravid and not be receptive to any male from the day after laying the first batch. IMO, considering this behavior, and speculating, it would seem that they are retaining sperm. This would explain how they may show recetive between, then suddenly start to show gravid, without a mating, If she had developed more eggs, and now retained sperm has done it's job, boom gravid colors. If fertilized eggs were in there all along I would think that she would show gravid from the day after the first lay. I am not opposing anyones thought on this... I find this totally facinating and would love to learn more about it from anyone with good info to offer.
I would also be interested to know if anyone knows of a good source of info on this.. Books, sites, Any reference material would be awesome.

Thanks,
~Joe

I can't take credit for this.
It came up in a discussion between Trace, Kent and myself ... and it was Kent who presented that theory for consideration.
I've cooked and stirred it around in my brain ever since and may not be presenting it exactly the way he did, but the basic premise is (in my opinion) worthy of some critical/educated thinking.

-Brad

Here's a good question:

Where in the females body is this sperm retained?

-Brad

Brad Ramsey said:

Where in the females body is this sperm retained?

Click to expand...

That is a good question.

I can understand why there might be a physiological need to retain sperm. We already know that egg-laying females can (and do) produce clutches of eggs whether they have been mated or not provided the right conditions prevail (those conditions seem to be heat and a plentiful supply of food). In the wild, it is possible that the female would retain sperm for situations where she might not be able to find a mate (given their solitary and dispersed lifestyles) the next time she comes across favourable conditions to produce eggs (a good patch of warm weather - the same conditions that could potentially spawn larger swarms of feeder insects).

So the motive may be there to retain sperm, but as you questioned Brad, does the mechanism for this exist? Have you discussed this with Chris A. at all?

Hey all, Joe just pointed me to this thread and asked for my thoughts so I thought I'd just copy and paste part of my response to him:

"Yeah, I've doubted that whole sperm retention story for many many years because it just doesn't make much sense. First of all, what is the first thing they teach you in sex ed about sperm? Males have testes that are constantly producing it because the shelf-life is pretty short. Outside of the body, it dies quickly. Inside the body (males or females), it dies quickly. But, somehow, female chams can magically keep it alive, somewhere unxeplained, by means unexplained?? I've never seen anything other than anecdotal evidence that sperm retention actually happens. "Two clutches, it must be sperm retention."

What really convinced me I might be onto something and made me start talking about the idea was that I heard female live-bearing chams have been found with sets of embryos inside them at totally different stages of development (when necropsied) along different "strings" of eggs. So again, it raises big questions: Why would a female Jackson's chameleon need to retain sperm if she is fertilizing two or three consecutive clutches at once? If she can retain sperm, and it is an evolutionary advantage (selecting for the strongest sperm), why on earth would she have a period of being unreceptive?"

omg!! that is crazy!! I have not heard that yet!! (In regards to the mother with triplets 1 being from another father!!)
As for being fathered by 2 different males, it is possible in any species of animals that have more then one uterine horn. Happens in cats and dogs and chinchillas etc...

this is exactly the kind of threads this forum needs, thank you

ok well consider this:


i know nothing about chams and how they develop eggs!!!!!so................

If a female is not retaining sperm and is retaining fertilized eggs instead.

female is mated
eggs are fertilized
if the female is retaining fert eggs then she will be holding aprox 80 eggs

40 will be fert off the first clutch that much we know

now come the questions

how many of the second 40 that she is holding are fert at the time of mating?

are all fert, and because they are in a " frozen " status they become weak, from not being allowed to develop? and thats why the second clutch has a lower hatch rate?

or are not all of the second 40 fert and thats why there is a low hatch rate?

this would have to mean there is some kinda of trigger or reason why the cham with 80 eggs produces decides to develop whatever number she does

IE: mated, 80 fert eggs, depending on the amount of fat, or temp she will develop less or more of the eggs she has?

i have way more questions but i gotta pick up my wife or shell kill me

Thanks Kent!

Man... This has me thinking... I am still on the same thought though... And it has to do with the thought Kent left off on, Unrecepetiveness. Kind of redundant from my post above, maybe I can word it better... With as fast as Females advertise Gravid colors after mating, (pretty stinkin quick) I would think that if there were any kind of fertile eggs developing in her after laying she would be showing gravid colors right after laying the first clutch, and want nothing to do with any males until after laying the second clutch. But it is common practice to mate them again before the second clutch to ensure that the eggs are fertile. It seems that some will have a receptive time after laying the first clutch, and can become gravid again shortly after, with a partly viable clutch without a mating. From an observational standpoint this would seem like she had reatined some sperm, somehow, and after not finding another mate deciding to utilize the reserves. But then I come to the great point Kent made... Sperm are shortlived little suckers as far as we know... So where and how could a female store sperm for later. This is the point in my thought process where I start scratching my head wondering what to think next. I like the point that Tygerr made about why they might retain sperm, having times in the wild where they may not come accross any males, I would buy this more than a natural selection type thing for choosing the strongest sperm. It seems like this "save it for later" kind of behavior is common in the animal kingdom, and I could see why it would be, as it can be very useful in a lot of different situations for survival of a species. Before this conversation I had always thought that it was proven that they could retain sperm. I like to see that we are constantly questioning things that before were maybe prematurely accepted as scientific fact.

I do not know nearly enough about egg production yet so I am not arguing that this is how it is... Just posing my thoughts to see what you guys think.