Thomas R.L. Madsen

Prof. Dr. Thomas R.L. Madsen


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

44Years (1983-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 November 1999 in Nature
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
TMThomas R.L. Madsen
Thomas R.L. Madsen
RSRichard Shine
Richard Shine
MOMats Olsson
Mats Olsson
HWHåkan Wittzell
Håkan Wittzell

22 March 1997 in Proceedings Of The Royal Society B-Biological Sciences
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MOMats Olsson
Mats Olsson
TMThomas R.L. Madsen
Thomas R.L. Madsen
RSRichard Shine
Richard Shine
Reproduction is energetically expensive for males as well as for females, but evolutionary biologists have typically regarded the energy costs of sperm production as trivial compared to the energy costs of overt reproductive behaviours, such as mate-searching, courtship, copulation and male–male combat. Adders (Vipera berus) offer an ideal model system in which to quantify the relative costs of spermatogenesis (and associated physiological preparations for reproductive activity) versus the costs of overt reproductive behaviours, because (i) these two activities occur sequentially rather than simultaneously, and are separated by a clear indicator (sloughing of the skin); and (ii) males do not feed during either of these phases. Hence, the rate of mass loss by males can be used as an index of energy costs. Surprisingly, the rate of mass loss is at least as high during the phase when males are immobile, building up sperm supplies, as when they move about and engage in reproductive behaviour. Rates of mass loss are not significantly correlated with male size or measures of the male's participation in reproductive activities. Our data suggest that sperm production may be a major energy cost to reproducing male adders, and that this species offers a useful system in which to further investigate this possibility.

1 January 1992 in Nature
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
TMThomas R.L. Madsen
Thomas R.L. Madsen
RSRichard Shine
Richard Shine
JLJon Loman
Jon Loman
THThomas Håkansson
Thomas Håkansson
MALES of most animal species will enhance their reproductive success if they mate often and with many different partners, whereas promiscuous mating is unlikely to increase a female's reproductive success. Why then is multiple copulation by females so common1–6? Many theoreticians have suggested that multiple copulations might enhance the viability of a female's offspring, either because of inadequate quantities of sperm from the first mating1,7, additional nutrients derived from the seminal fluid7,8 or some genetic advantage9–14. Our field studies on Swedish adders provide the first empirical evidence that multiple copulations, with different partners each time, increase offspring viability. This advantage apparently results from more intense sperm competition in the female's reproductive tract, resulting in a higher proportion of her ova being fertilized by genetically superior males.

17 October 1996 in Nature
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
MOMats Olsson
Mats Olsson
RSRichard Shine
Richard Shine
TMThomas R.L. Madsen
Thomas R.L. Madsen
AGAnnica Gullberg
Annica Gullberg
HTHåkan Tegelström
Håkan Tegelström

7 November 2003 in Proceedings Of The Royal Society B-Biological Sciences
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MOMats Olsson
Mats Olsson
TMThomas R.L. Madsen
Thomas R.L. Madsen
JNJessica Nordby
Jessica Nordby
EWErik Wapstra
Erik Wapstra
BUBeata Ujvari
Beata Ujvari
HWHåkan Wittsell
Håkan Wittsell
In mice and man, females prefer males with a major histocompatibility complex (MHC) genotype different to their own. We tested whether this phenomenon also occurs in the Swedish sand lizard (Lacerta agilis). Females in a laboratory experiment preferred to associate with odour samples obtained from more distantly related males at the MHC class 1 loci. Data on free-ranging lizards suggest that associations between males and females are nonrandom with respect to MHC genotype. However, male spatial distribution and mobility during the mating season suggest that the non-random pairing process in the wild may also be driven by corresponding genetic benefits to males pairing with less related females.

1 December 2000 in Journal of Animal Ecology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
TMThomas R.L. Madsen
Thomas R.L. Madsen
RSRichard Shine
Richard Shine