↓ Skip to main content

Small females prefer small males: size assortative mating in Aedes aegypti mosquitoes

Overview of attention for article published in Parasites & Vectors, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

26 tweeters

Readers on

31 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Small females prefer small males: size assortative mating in Aedes aegypti mosquitoes
Published in
Parasites & Vectors, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13071-018-3028-9
Pubmed ID

Ashley G. Callahan, Perran A. Ross, Ary A. Hoffmann


With Aedes aegypti mosquitoes now being released in field programmes aimed at disease suppression, there is interest in identifying factors influencing the mating and invasion success of released mosquitoes. One factor that can increase release success is size: released males may benefit competitively from being larger than their field counterparts. However, there could be a risk in releasing only large males if small field females avoid these males and instead prefer small males. Here we investigate this risk by evaluating mating success for mosquitoes differing in size. We measured mating success indirectly by coupling size with Wolbachia-infected or uninfected mosquitoes and scoring cytoplasmic incompatibility. Large females showed no evidence of a mating preference, whereas small males were relatively more successful than large males when mating with small females, exhibiting an advantage of around 20-25%. Because field females typically encompass a wide range of sizes while laboratory reared (and released) males typically fall into a narrow size range of large mosquitoes, these patterns can influence the success of release programmes which rely on cytoplasmic incompatibility to suppress populations and initiate replacement invasions. Releases could include some small males generated under low food or crowded conditions to counter this issue, although this would need to be weighed against issues associated with costs of producing males of various size classes.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 31 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 42%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 16%
Student > Bachelor 4 13%
Student > Postgraduate 2 6%
Other 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 5 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 32%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 26%
Environmental Science 3 10%
Social Sciences 2 6%
Unspecified 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 5 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 August 2018.
All research outputs
of 15,555,958 outputs
Outputs from Parasites & Vectors
of 4,171 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 278,680 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Parasites & Vectors
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,555,958 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,171 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 278,680 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them