Content uploaded by Darío J. Diaz Cosin
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Darío J. Diaz Cosin
Content may be subject to copyright.
Chapter 5
Reproduction of Earthworms: Sexual Selection
and Parthenogenesis
Darı
´
oJ.Dı
´
az Cosı
´
n, Marta Novo, and Rosa Ferna
´
ndez
5.1 Introduction
Earthworms are generally considered to be cross-fertilization hermaphrodites (i.e.,
using reciprocal insemination, transferring, and receiving sperm in the same copu-
lation). Although not all earthworms use this reproductive strategy, the best known
species, Lumbricus terrestris, is a cross-fertilization hermaphrodite and this strat-
egy seems to be the most widespread in earthworms. Nevertheless, cases of self-
fertilization have been reported in earthworms; Domı
´
nguez et al. (2003) discussed
that Eisenia andrei individuals bend themselves, allowing their spermathecal pores
to contact the ventral zone of their clitellum. The sperm is then transported from the
male pores to the spermathecae. This finding explains why 33% of isolated indivi-
duals in this study produced viable cocoons.
However, hermaphroditism is not the only reproductive mechanism and
more parthenogenetic earthworms are being discovered all the time, most of
which a re polyploid. Parthenogenetic reproduction is very frequent in the family
Lumbricidae, with more than 30 parthenogenetic species occurring in North
America (Reynolds 1974). Parthenogenesis has also been reported in families
such as Megascolecids, but has not been observed in other families, including
Glossoscolecids.
“Asexual” reproduction by means of bipartition, stolonisation, budding, or
similar processes has not been observed in earthworms and their ability to regener-
ate is limited. There are several reproductive models: discontinuous, sem icontin-
uous, or continuous. In Hormogaster elisae, male and female gametogenesis are
synchronized, beginning in autumn and ending in the summer. Male funnels are full
of spermatozoa and the spermathecae contain spermatozoa throughout the year , but
D.J. Dı
´
az Cosı
´
n(*), M. Novo, and R. Ferna
´
ndez
Departamento de Zoologı
´
a, Facultad de Biologı
´
a, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Ciudad
Universitaria, 28040 Madrid, Spain
e-mail: dadico@bio.ucm.es
A. Karaca (ed.), Biology of Earthworms , Soil Biology 24,
DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-14636-7_5,
#
Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011
69
two peaks of reproduction have been observed, with the largest peak occurring in
the spring and the second peak occurring in autumn (Garvı
´
n et al. 2003).
An excellent description of the earthworm reproductive system can be found in
general zoology volumes and monographs such as Jamieson (2006), so it will be
only succinctly described in the present chapter. Earthworms are usually hermaph-
rodites in which the testes and ovaries are accompanied by a series of organs with a
male or female function. The female components typically include the ovaries
(generally one pair in the 13th segment), ovisacs (in the 14th segment), oviducts,
female pores (in the 14th segment), and spermathecae (of variable position and
number). Male components typically include the testes and male funnels (in most
cases, there are two pairs in the 10th and 11th segments and singularly a single pair
in the 11th segment), seminal vesicles (of variable number, with 2–4 occurring in
segments 9–12), deferent ducts, and male pores surrounde d by atrial glands that are
more or less developed. Other organs, such as testicular sacs (Lumbricus and
Octolasium), accessory glands (prostates), or the thecal glands associated with the
spermathecae, may also be present.
Some of the external reproductive organs, such as the clitellum, tubercula
pubertatis, and sexual papillae, are developed at sexua l maturity. The sexual
papillae include modified genital chaetae and chaetal glands, which could be used
to inject substances into the partner (see Sect. 8.2.2).
The union during copulation, which could last between 69 and 200 min in
L. terrestris, is secured by tubercula and quetae. Copulation can occur at the surface
in epigeic and anecic earthworms, which increases the depredation risk, and also
occurs in deeper layers of the soil in the case of endogeic species. The more
primitive type of copulation seems to be a simple juxtaposition of the male pores
of one individual and the spermathecal pores of the other, with the dir ect transfer of
spermatozoa. The presence of a penis has been observed in some cases, which in
reality seems to be just an elevated papilla, as in the case of some Pheretima
species.
In most of the species in the Lumbricidae family and in other families, the
clitellum moves backwards and seminal groves are developed from the male pores
to the tubercula pubertatis. Spermatozoa flow through the seminal grove s to get into
the partner’s spermathecae pores. Details of sperm transfer are not well known with
the exception of a few species such as Pheretima sp., in which, according to Tembe
and Dubash (1961), the sperm appears to be transferred sequentially, passing first to
the anterior spermathecae and later to the posterior ones.
Bouche
´
(1975) indicated that spermatophores have been observed in more than
20 species of lumbricids. Spermatophores are small capsules that adhere to the body
wall and can be iridescent and full of spermatozoa. Their function is not clear. It has
been suggested that the spermatophores may play a role in sperm transfer (Edwards
and Bohlen 1996), thus avoiding sperm digestion in the spermathecae and fertiliz-
ing the ova during cocoon formation Michiels (1998). Nevertheless, Monroy et al.
(2003) showed that spermatophores have no effect on the reproductive success of
Eisenia fetida and were not able to demonstrate the specific function of these
capsules.
70 D.J. Dı
´
az Cosı
´
n et al.
Complex prec opulatory behaviors have been describ ed in partner selection in
some species, including L. terrestris, in which individuals perform visits to their
neighbors’ burrows (Nuutinen and Butt 1997; Michiels et al. 2001, see Sect. 8.2.1).
Development is direct in earthworms. Fertilization occurs within cocoon s and one
or more juveniles are produced for each cocoon.
The presence of parthenogenesis in earthworms was first observed many years
ago, thanks to the contributions of authors such as Omodeo (1951), Casel lato
(1987), Jaenicke and Selander (1979) and Victorov (1997), among others.
Reynolds (1974) pointed out that in North America 35 species are anphimictic,
11 probably sexual, 4 facultative parthenogenetic, 1 possibly parthenogenetic, and
30 parthenogenetic. Casellato (1987 ) cited 25 parthenogenetic species or subspe-
cies (12 of which had even ploidy numbers and 13 of which showed odd ploidy) and
Victorov (1997) pointed out that in Russia, the number of polyploids almost equals
the number of diploids, with a ratio of 46 polyploids: 52 diploids. He observed that
polyploids (in cases of sympatry) tend to occupy the margins of the distribution
areas. According to Edwards and Bohlen (1996), the association between partheno-
genesis and high polyploidy in earthworms produces an unexpected level of
heterozygosity, an advantageous condition that provides resistance to environmen-
tal stress.
5.2 Sexual Selection in Cross-Fertilization Earthworms
In simultaneous hermaphrodites, a trade-off between male and female sexual
functions is expected becau se the two sexes share limited reso urces from the
same individual. In addition, the strategy that maximizes fitness is different for
the male and female functions. This has been explained previously by Bateman
(1948), who showed that the higher the number of partners, the higher the fitness for
the male function becau se it produces small sperm cells. Nevertheless, female
function maximizes its fitness by seeking high quality mates because it produces
large eggs and this function has to invest in cocoon production. As a consequence,
there is a conflict between the sexes. Indeed, Porto et al. (2008) found a negative
relationship between the present investment in male function and the future fertility
of the female function in their research on E. andrei . Sexual selection is expected to
occur because of female function as long as a sufficient number of mates are
available.
5.2.1 Precopulatory Sexual Selection
Copulation is very costly and involves sperm and mucus production and long
periods of time. Consequently, precopulatory selection is expected in environments
where the density of earthworm s is high.
5 Reproduction of Earthworms: Sexual Selection and Parthenogenesis 71
One of the factors that could influence precopulatory sexual selection is the
female fecundity of the partner, which may be related to body size. Large earth-
worms have not been found to produce more cocoons (Tato et al. 2006; Butt and
Nuutinen 1998) but they do tend to produce heavier cocoons and larger offspring
(Michiels et al. 2001). Size-assortative mating was indeed observed in the field for
the epigeic E. fetida (Monroy et al. 2005) and for the endoge ic H. elisae (Novo et al.
in press), as well as in laboratory experiments for the anecic L. terrestris (Michiels
et al. 2001). Earthworms selected similar-sized partners. Because ever y earthworm
seeks a bigger partner, equilibrium is finally reached, resulting in partners with a
similar weight, thus balancing the expectations of both mates on female and male
functions. In the particular case of epigeic and anecic worms, which can copulate at
the surface, this general tendency could be reinforced by a trade-off; worms can
either select a bigger, more fecund partner or a smaller partner, which would
decrease the risk of predation.
In ongoing laboratory experiments with H. elisae, we have observed that there is
no such size selection in virgin individuals, although the bigger virgin individuals
always managed to copulate so they seem to be more desirable.
Aside from size, reciprocation is sought from a potential partner. In simulta-
neous hermaphrodites, the primary purpose of mating is to fertilize the eggs of their
partners, rather than to fertilize their own eggs. Therefore, the conflict of two
earthworms copulating would be the amount of sperm that each of them is allowed
to give (Michiels 1998).
Finally, the quality of the place where cocoons are deposited after copulation
and the suitability of the burrow for offspring development (i.e., the moisture or
litter content) could be important factors for precopulatory assessment. Ortiz-
Ceballos and Fragoso (2006) studied parental care in Pontoscolex corethrurus
and Balanteodrilus pears ei . They found that both species build up a chamber that
they periodically clean and surround with fresh casts where a single cocoon is
deposited. Grigoropoulou et al. (2008) observed that L. terrestris deposits the
cocoons inside burrows, which may offer a protective location from the physical
environment or may represent parental investment as they were also found to be
coated with earthworm casts. These casts could be a means of maintaining the
moisture content or protecting cocoons from predators.
The mechanism through which earthworms choose a mate, assess size, test
reciprocity, or assess the burrow quality of their potential partners remains
unknown, although there are some data on these factors. Chemical cues have
been suggested in earthworms as a mechanism of finding and attracting the mate
(Olive and Clark 1978; Edwards and Bohlen 1996).
Grove and Cowley (1926) suggested the existence of a courtship in E. fetida as
they observed short and repeated touches between partners before mating. This type
of contact, executed with the prostomium, was also observed by Nuutinen and Butt
(1997)inL. terrestris and could last 90 min. The prostomium has been described as
a sensory lobe with many chemoreceptors or sensory cells (Wallwork 1983).
During contact, the clitellum and associated structures could be indicators of
female functionality and glandular margins of the male pores could be indicators
72 D.J. Dı
´
az Cosı
´
n et al.
of male functionality. These structures could provide a means of evaluating the
partner and assuring reciprocation. Reciprocation can also be assured by increasing
the copulation time, which would prevent the partner from copulating with other
earthworms. In addition, Nuutinen and Butt (1997) observed that L. terrestris
visited the potential mate’s burrow by inserting its anterior segments, but retaining
the posterior segments in their own burrows, as a mechanism to evaluate the
quality.
In case of the size assessment, it is also suggested that assortative mating could
be due to a physical incompatibility of the copula among individuals of differ ent
sizes (Michiels et al. 2001), although this incompatibility would only result from
large differences in size.
These selective forces depend on other factors, such as the density of earth-
worms or the distance of potential mates. Indeed, the low dispersal ability of these
animals provides a restriction in the number of available mates. Earthworms have
low migration rates, with observed natural dispersal rates of only 1.4–9 m year
1
(Ligthart and Peek 199 7 ; Hale et al. 2005) and are therefore expected to mate with
partners living in their vicinity. In addition, in the case of the earthworms who
copulate at the surface, a smaller distance to the partner would also minimize the
risk of predation. There is evidence for this selective limitation produced by
distance. Nuutinen and Butt (1997) investigated burrow visit patterns in L. terrestris
and found that the nearer the burrow opening was, the more visits the worms made
to assess the potential part ner quality. In addition, Sahm et al. (2009) showed mate
choice in the same species for its closest partner and Novo et al. (in press) found that
H. elisae do not move long distances to find mating partners. Nevertheless, this low
dispersal could cause inbreedi ng, which is generally accepted to be unadaptative
and would reduce the fitness of the offspring. Partner selection has not been found
to be dependent on relatedness (i.e., kin recognition), and Novo et al. (in press) did
not find a correlation between mating probabilities and the level of heterozygosity
in H. elisae. Regarding this, differential investment in offspring is thought to occur
(Velando et al. 2006, see Sect. 8.2.2).
Finally, parasite concentrations may influence mate choice, since they can have
a negative effect on earthworm growth as shown by Field and Michiels (2005) for
the association between Monocystis and L. terrestris. In addition, earthworm skin
color could be positively correlated with parasite concentration (Field et al. 2003),
which could be a sign used to evaluate partners. Nevertheless, Sahm et al. (2009)
failed in an attempt to show a relationship between parasite concentration and mate
choice, and more studies are neede d to assess this correlation.
5.2.2 Postcopulatory Sexual Selection
In spite of the precopulatory sexual selection, multiple mating is common in
earthworms (Monroy et al. 2003;Sahmetal.2 009;Novoetal.inpress)andall
the allosperm receive d is stored and sometimes mixed (Novo et al. in press) in the
5 Reproduction of Earthworms: Sexual Selection and Parthenogenesis 73
spermathecae. Therefore, postcopulatory sexual selection such as sperm competi-
tion (Parker 1970) or cryptic female choice (Thornhill 1983) could be expected.
The sperm remains viable in the spermathecae until fertilization. Butt and
Nuutinen (1998) observed that L. terrestris was capable of successfully maintaining
the received sperm up to 6 months. Meyer and Bowman (1994) reported that
E. fetida cont inued cocoon production for up to 12 months after the earthworms
were isolated from their partner, although these authors did not measure viability.
Garvı
´
n et al. (2003) reported sperma thecae full of spermatozoa during diapause in
H. elisae. This would be advantageous for species with poor dispersal capac ities or
for species that occur in low densities that can copulate at any time of the year.
The maintenance of sperm for such a long time implies the existence of some
kind of preservation mechanism. There is evidence suggesting that the spermathe-
cal epithelium actively contributes to the successful maintenance of sperm by
providing a favorable luminal environment (Grove 1925; Varuta and More 1972)
or by producing nourishing substances (Vyas and Dev 1972; Jamieson 1992; Novo
et al. (unpublished data))
A possible mechanism for postcopulatory sexual selection developed by the
recipient is sperm digestion. Richards and Fleming (1982 ) observed spermatozoal
phagocytosis by the spermathecae of the facultative parthenogenetic Dendrobaena
subrubicunda and other lumbricids. This is likely related to the removal of aging or
aberrant sperm during the months when cocoon production was minimal. Novo
et al. (unpublished data) found sperm degeneration in the central area of spermathe-
cae from H. elisae (Fig. 5.1a, b). These authors also observed sperm intrusions into
the epithel ium of spermathecae with high sperm contents, although these intrusions
seemed to occur in areas where the sperm sought more nutrients rather than
phagocytosis processes (Fig. 5.1c). Future ultrastructure studies will shed light on
these mechanisms.
Fig. 5.1 Histological preparations of the spermathecae from H. elisae. Sperm degeneration (a and
b in detail). Sperm intrusions in the epithelium of the spermathecae (c)
74 D.J. Dı
´
az Cosı
´
n et al.
Another strategy for cryptic female choice could be the differential storage of the
received allosperm within the spermathecae. The recipient can control the storage of
sperm by increasing the complexity of these organs. Different species of earthworms
have different numbers of spermathecae (Sims and Gerard 1999), although Novo
et al. (in press) demonstrated using microsatellite markers that the four spermathe-
cae from H. elisae contained sperm from the same individuals. Grove and Cowley
(1926) observed that the transmission of sperm in E. fetida typically occurs on both
sides of the individual, whereas in L. terrestris some indi viduals were found to have
spermatophores on only one side of their body (Butt and Nuutinen 1998).
Moreover, some earthworms present different sperm loads within a single
spermathecae. This has been observed in some hormogastrids (Qiu and Bouche
´
1998), and in Megascolides australis, in which spermatozeugmata (i.e., sperm in
orientated bundles) were reported by Van Praagh (1995). In addition, the sper-
mathecae may include one or more diverticula that arise from the duct (Butt and
Nuutinen 1998).
Finally, the amount of sperm stored in each spermatheca could be controlled,
and this occurs for L. terrestris, which predominantly store sperm in the two
posterior spermathecae when there is no injection of allohormones (Koene et al.
2005, see later). Garvı
´
n et al. (2003 ) also observed that the second pair of sper-
mathecae seems to be the main recipient of spermatozoa in H. elisae. However,
Velando et al. (2008) showed that E. andrei distributes the sperm equally among the
four spermathecae.
Cryptic female choice may also be achieved through differential investmen t in
offspring. Velando et al. (2006) found that E. andrei adjusted the breeding effort to
the degree of mate relatedness, showing that inbreeding and outbreeding cause a
strong reduction of cocoon production, especially in genetic lines with high repro-
ductive rates.
Sexual selection drives the evolution of strategies that increase the chances of
fertilization for the donated sperm as a means of increasing paternity. Some of these
strategies have been observed in earthworms. Velando et al. (2008) reported a
behavior that could promote sperm competition in E. andrei, which can have a high
degree of control over their own ejaculate volume after evaluating their partners.
This species donated three times as much sperm as they did normally when mating
with a nonvirgin mate. Moreover, such increases were greater when the worms
mated with larger partners. Marin
˜
o et al. (2006) also showed a sperm trade in
E. andrei, which adjusted the amount of sper m they release to the volume they
receive from their mating partner during copulation. In addition, the total sperm
volume they found in the spermathecae was correlated to the recipient’s body mass,
indicating that this adjustment is in accordance with the quality of the partner.
Koene et al. (2002) proposed that during mating, L. terrestris use their copula-
tory setae to pierce their partner’s skin to inject an allohormone produced by the
setal glands which manipulates the reproduct ive physiology of the partner and
damages the body wall. The injection of this substance provokes a higher uptake
of sperm, a more equal sperm distribution over the four spermathecae, and an
increase the amount of time occurring before the next mating. The damage caused
5 Reproduction of Earthworms: Sexual Selection and Parthenogenesis 75
by the injection itself could incur a considerable cost that inhibits another mating
(Koene et al. 2005).
5.3 Parthenogenesis
5.3.1 Definition
Parthenogenesis is a very wide collective concept. Historically, classical authors
addressed this concept on several occasions; although not defining the concept or
providing an experimental appro ach, authors posed hints regarding the existence of
this kind of reproduction. Although Bonnet provided experimental proof for this
kind of reproduction in aphids in 1762, it was not until 1849 that Richard Owen
coined the term. He defined parthenogenesis as “procreation without the immediate
influence of a male”. As this general concept could include several typically asexual
modes of reproduction such as fission or budding, several authors attempted to
create new definitions for this term. A century later, Suomalainen (1950) defined it
as “the development of the egg cell into a new individual without fertilization”.
Later, Beatty (1957) defined it first as “the production of an embryo from a female
gamete without the concurrence of a male gamete, and with or without eventual
development into an adult”, but modified the definition in 1967 (Beatty 1967)by
substituting “without any genetic contribution from a male gamete” for “concur-
rence of a male gamete”. In this way, Beatty extended the definition to include
special types of parthenogenesis such as gynogenesis. Nevertheless, all of these
definitions give rise to some terminological difficulties.
5.3.2 Types of Parthen ogenesis in Earthworms
Several classifications have been used to define the different types of parthenoge-
netic mechanisms. To understand earthworm cla ssification of parthenogenesis, it is
worth mentioning the classifications proposed by Thomsen (1927); Ankel (1927);
Suomalainen ( 1950) and White (1973); these are mainly based on the mode of
reproduction, sex determination, and cytology.
The system of classification proposed by Thomsen (1927) and Ankel (1927)
points out two main points: the zygoid–azygoid status of an individual and the
maintenance of the zygoid chromosome number. It includes two main categories:
generative or haploid parthenogenesis (in which chromosome reduction take s place
in the eggs, and consequently the parthenogenetic offspring have an azygoid –
haploid-number of chromosomes), and somatic parthenogenesis, in which parthe-
nogenetic offspring have a zygoid–diploid or polyploid-chromosome numb er.
76 D.J. Dı
´
az Cosı
´
n et al.
The difference between the two categories basically depends on the absence
(apomixis) or presence (automixis) of chromosome conjugation and reduction.
Both concepts are synonymous with White’s concepts of ameiotic and meiotic
parthenogenesis, respectively.
When considering sex determination, it is especially useful to use the classifica-
tion of parthenogenesis proposed by Suomalainen et al. (1987): arrhenotoky,
thelytoky and deut erotoky, or amphitoky (unfertilized eggs producing only male
descendants, only females, or descendants of both sexes, respective ly).
Parthenogenetic earthworms are generally automictic and thelytokous. Follow-
ing the cytological studies of Muldal ( 1952); Omodeo ( 1951, 1952, among others)
and Casellato and Rodighiero (1972), there is a premeiotic doubling of the chromo-
some number at the last oogonial divisions resu lting in endomitosis, followed by
the formation of chiasmatic bivalents and regular meiosis with the extrusion of two
polar bodies. The genetic consequences of this cytological mechanism are similar
to those of apomixis (i.e., the formation of clonal animals), as synapsis is restricted
to sister chromosomes that are exact molecu lar copies of one another. The immedi-
ate genetic conse quence of this mechanism is that heterozygosity is maintained.
Following White (1973), all bivalents are structurally homozygous and multiva-
lents are never formed. Consequently, this kind of reproduction is perfectly com-
patible with different degrees of polyploidy, especially in odd-numbered levels
(Fig. 5.2).
Only one exception to the parthenogenetic mechanism described above has been
found. Dendrobaena octaedra shows apomictic parthenogenesis: the chromosome
number is not doubled in the oogonia, the chromosome number of the oocytes is
unreduced, and there is only one equational maturation division (Suom alainen et al.
1987). For this species, Omodeo (1953) and later Gates (1972; as explained later in
this chapter) described different parthenogenetic forms with a huge degree of
morphological variation, which makes it very difficult to establish the evolutionary
relationships among them. Omodeo (1953) suggested that “it could be the result of a
breakdown of developmental canalisation in the absence of stabilizing selection”,
while White (1973) indicated that “it seems more likely that it indicates the
coexistence of numerous biotypes differing significantly from one another geneti-
cally, even if not in their visible cytology”.
Parthenogenesis is one of the main sources of morphological variability within
reproductive structures of earthworms. This variability is related to the reduction in
the investment in male structures: seminal vesicl es, testes, spermathecae, genital
setae, and prostates are reduced or even lacking; there is no sperm production (i.e.,
lack of iridescence in male funnels and sperma thecae); and sperma tophores are
lacking (in some cases they are produced but are invariably empty). In Octolasion
tyrtaeum (Muldal 1952; Jaenicke and Selander 1979), male structures are not
reduced and pseudo gamy is shown: individuals copulate to exchange spermato-
phores that are invariably empty. Thus, although spermatozoids are not necessary,
this species needs a mechanical or chemical stim ulus to trigger reproduction.
Polymorphic degradation of reproductive structures is often observed in partheno-
genetic organisms. In some species, such as Eiseniella tetraedra even hypergynous
5 Reproduction of Earthworms: Sexual Selection and Parthenogenesis 77
individuals (with an extra pair of ovaries) can be found (Jaenicke and Selander
1979). However, in other parthenogenetic earthworms such as Aporrectodea tra-
pezoides, both primary and secondary male sexual characters, such as perithecal
papillae, tubercula pubertatis, spermathecae, swo llen male porophores, and seminal
vesicles, are retained. Recent studies show that pseudogamy is not observed in this
species (Ferna
´
ndez et al. 2010). As discussed later, this seems to suggest very
different origins of parthenogenesis in the different species.
Parthenogenesis is not homogenously distributed in earthworms; it is only found
in lumbricids and megascolecids. It is curious that it is not found (or not known to
occur) in glossoscolecids or hormogastrids; this clearly shows that their life traits or
evolutionary histories should be completely different and that somehow partheno-
genesis and even polyploidy are not compatible or viable in this family.
Fig. 5.2 Automictic parthenogenesis: the genetic consequences of premeiotic restitution
78 D.J. Dı
´
az Cosı
´
n et al.
5.3.3 Parthenogenesis and Polyploidy
Most part of the parthenogenetic earthworms are polyploids. Polyploidy ranges
from tri- to dodecaploidy. From a cytogenetical point of view, automictic biotypes
should be diploid (White 1973 ); nevertheless, in parthenogenetic lumbricids, poly-
ploidy is the most common phenomenon. This is because, as explained later, the
automictic mechanism in most lumbrici ds is premeiotic doubling, which leads to
genetic consequences similar to an apomictic mechanism, leaving levels of hetero-
zygosity unchanged from generation to generation (Suomalainen 1950). Because of
premeiotic doubling, no multivalents are formed, so pairing only occurs between
genetically identical sister chromosomes; this mechanism is compatible with odd-
numbered polyploidy, as only bivalents are formed. This is the complicated chro-
mosomal background that can give rise to different ploidy levels even within the
same species. For example, in Dendrobaena rubida, diploid, triploid, tetraploid,
hexaploid, and octoploid biotypes are known to occur, which clearly shows the
extremely high liability of the genetic system. It has been proposed that automixis
could be a step before apomixis (White 1973), which could mean that most
lumbricids could be evolving toward an apomictic partheno genesis. Polyploi dy
could be common in earthworms, as animals lacking the chromos omal determina-
tion of sex are particularly prone to this kind of repr oduction, which is the main
mechanism preventing the establishment of polyploidy in animals (White 1973).
One of the main advantages of polyploidy in parthenogenetic species is the increase
in genetic variability.
Since no study to date has elucidated the origin of parthenogenetic earthworms
(as explained later in this chapter), it is not known if parthenogenetic earthworms
may have arisen from hybridisation processes. These kinds of processes have been
found to be very common mechanisms causing asexuality (only to the extent that
parthenogenesis can be considered to be asexual reproduction) in animals and
plants (Delmotte et al. 2003). Following this assumption, polyploidy (and particu-
larly allopolyploidy) could provide important advantages, such as heterosis, to
parthenogenetic species. This strong advantage could lead the parthenogenetic
morphs to have more general purpose genotypes, allowing them to adapt to a
wider range of environmental conditions than their sexual amphimictic ancestors
(White 1973). There is much evidence that hybrid vigor could be responsible for the
success of polyploids, but there is insufficient information to determine this with
certainty.
5.3.4 Genetic and Ecological Consequences of Cloning
As stated by Hugh es (1989), it is extremely difficult to define the advantages or
disadvantages of parthenogenesis, as these depend on the situation; for some groups
of animals, parthenogenesis is tremendously advantage ous, while in others it is not.
5 Reproduction of Earthworms: Sexual Selection and Parthenogenesis 79
Therefore, natural selection should control the pattern of occurrence in each group
of animals.
Using molecular tools, very different degrees of genetic variability have been
reported in different species. Both with allozyme electrophoresis and with mito-
chondrial gene sequencing, genetic variability was recorded as being high in
D. octaedra (Haimi et al. 2007; Terhivuo and Saura 1996; Cameron et al. 2008)
and Aporrectodea rosea (Terhivuo and Saura 1993; King et al. 2008), but low in
O. tyrtaeum (Jaenicke et al. 1980; Heethoff et al. 2004) and O. cyaneum (Terhivuo
and Saura 2003). In A. trapezoides, both mitochondr ial and nuclear sequences
resulted in an extremely high number of clones (Ferna
´
ndez et al. unpublished data.).
Judging from the number and distribution of partheno genetic earthworms, one
could expect that parthenogenesis is quite advantageous in this group. Parthenoge-
netic earthworms are widespread and very abundant, especially among peregrine
species (Blakemore 1994) such as A. rosea, A. trapezoides,orO. tyrtaeum. Hughes
(1989) pointed out the following advantages of parthenogenesis: both high levels of
heterozygosity and exceptionally fit genomes, which are maintained and inherited
by avoiding recombination and segregation; high reproductive rates, which could
potentially be doubled by avoiding the production of males (i.e., no twofold cost in
parthenogenetic reproduction); high colonizing abilities, since there is no need to
mate; high values of reproductive potential, enabling clones to quickly replace
losses; advanced polymorphism generated from selection at the level of the
genome; and the delay or prevention of senescence as somatic replicas from
undifferentiated somatic cells are generated. In reference to the last advantage,
Hughes (1989) pointed out that several clones of oligochaetes did not show any
signs of senescence after having been maintained for many generations.
5.3.5 The Species Concept in Parthenogenetic Earthworms
Parthenogenetic earthworms were wisely defined as “system atist’s nightmares” by
Blakemore (1999). The biological species criterion cannot be applied to partheno-
genetic earthworms, as each individual meets the criterion of being completely
reproductively isolated not only from the parental species, but also from every sister
clone. Several authors have attempted to resolve this problem, but an agreement has
never been reached. Mayr (1963) suggested that the best solution would be to use a
morphological criterion. Following this author (1963), a parthenogenetic species
would be the one that “results in the combination of a single species of those
asexual individuals that disp lay no greater morphological difference from each
other than from conspecific individuals or populations in related bisexual species”.
He also proposed that clones can be combined into collective species when no
essential morphological or biological differences have been observed. To complete
this criterion, the author also argued that if a parthenogenetic line originated from
an amphimictic species by an irreversible chromosomal event (such as polyploidy),
it should be considered to be a separate and sibling species, although almost no
80 D.J. Dı
´
az Cosı
´
n et al.
morphological differences could exist. This criterion has traditionally been used to
define species in parthenogenetic lumbricids, though it can be difficult to apply as
the degree of morphological variation is sometimes slight and the features defining
parthenogenetic and even amphimictic species can overlap. This is a particularly
big problem in complexes of very similar species containing both amphimictic and
parthenogenetic species such as the “Aporrectodea caliginosa species” complex. In
this context, other approaches, as discussed later, could be essential not only for
properly defining parthenogenetic species, but also for determining the taxonomic
status of each form in these species complexes.
Following Gates (1974), “the species is understood to include not only the
interbreeding population, but also all recently evolved uniparental strains, clones,
or morphs that clearly are affiliated with it”. This statement is useful when inter-
mediate forms are found, but still does not solve the problem of how to resolve the
status of parthenogenetic species with unknown (or extinct) amphimictic parental
species. Another option would be to use the phylogenetic concept of species based
on molecular markers, which would provide information about the genetic diver-
gence between morphs or species. However, these tools are not so well developed in
earthworms that they could provide a good idea as to the exact amount of diver-
gence that should be used to differentiate between species. In addition, there is
evidence of different degrees of divergence among closely related species in the
different earthworms groups. The best way to define a parthenogenetic species (and
amphimictic species, particularly when dealing with complex of species) is to use
an integrative concept of species, using ecological, behavioral, morphological, and
molecular data. A species should not be given a name if its biology is not well
understood, but then, it is completely necessary to name the species . Parthenoge-
netic species are very common among the earthworms, and thus a solution needs to
be found. The ideal study would be one using all of the available approaches to
examine the same individuals so as not to incorporate any source of error or
introduce any possible mistakes when identifying species. Making comparisons
with previously published data is dangerous because different authors might have
incorrectly identified species when dealing with partheno genetic morphs or species
from a complex, in which intermediate forms are typically found. The best means of
eliminating this uncertainty is to deposit the individuals used in the experiments
into a collection.
Gates (1974) categorized parthenogenetic morphs of D. octaedra using the
presence or absence of different reproductive male structures. Gates (1974) defined
morphs lacking spermathecae, male terminalia, testes, testis sacs, or seminal vesi-
cles or those lacking several of these structures (e.g., athecal anarsenosomphic, with
or without testes). He also included two categories of intermediate morphs with an
incomplete or asymmetrical deletion of the above organs: hermaphroditic parthe-
nogenetic morphs were defined as those that had reproductive organs in a juvenile
state, while hermaphroditic morphs used biparental reproduction and were also
parthenogenetic. Unfortunately, few studies have demonstrated the existence of
these forms in every parthenogenetic species ; the knowledge about the extension
and degree of parthenogenetic morphs in parthenogenetic species is quite limited.
5 Reproduction of Earthworms: Sexual Selection and Parthenogenesis 81
This is a problem both for clarifying the taxonomy of earthworms using this type of
reproduction, and for understanding the origin of parthenogenesis in these species.
Gates (1974) and Blakemore (1999) suggeste d that parthenogenetic morphs
should be given a name only when the parental amphimictic species can be
determined. We totally agree with this statement. Nevertheless, as Blakemore
suggested, the origin of the name, regardless of whether it was based on morphs
or parthenogenetic forms, has no effect on the availability of a taxonomic name
(ICZN 1999, Article 17.3). Moreover, Gates (1972) suggested that provision of
names for all intermediate morphs of such species complexes was ridiculous.
Another limitation, as stated by Suomalainen et al. (1987), is that there are still
very few examples of taxonomic diversification beyond the species level in parthe-
nogenetic earthworms.
5.3.6 The Origin of Parthenogenetic Forms
Amphimictic ancestors of parthenogenetic forms are well known in many different
animal groups, but this is not the case for Lumbricids. Hybridization has been
proposed several times (e.g., Suomalainen et al. 1987) as a common origin of
parthenogenetic animal species such as fishes, lizards, and salamanders. Among
invertebrates, there are many examples of parthenogenetic forms originating from
Hybridization in the literature. This is the case, for example, for parthenogenetic
forms in delphacid leaf-hoppers or stick insects belonging to the genus Acanthoxyla
which were described as having two haploid genomes, one of which came from an
amphimictic parental species (Buckley et al. 2008). Suomalainen et al. (1987) also
gave some examples among invertebrates in which parthenogenesis seems to have
arisen through a single mutational event, or through multiple events. In these cases,
parthenogenesis was a polyphyletic condition within a single species as, for exam-
ple, in the psychid moth Solenobia triquetrella.
Little is known about the origin of parthenogenetic earthworms. Molecular
biology will be very useful in shedding light on this topic. Several tools can be
useful in reaching this goal. Traditionally, some studies using allozymes have been
used to check genetic variability in parthenogenetic and sexually reproducing
species that are related, such as A. trapezoides and A. caliginosa (Cobolli Sbordoni
et al. 1987). However, the information obtained using this technique was not
sufficient to evaluate hypotheses regarding the origin of parthenogenetic forms.
An appropriate first approach would be to compare phylogenies using both mito-
chondrial and nuclear genes. To determine whether parthenogenetic species origi-
nated from hybridisation, alleles could be cloned in nuclear genes to check for the
presence of different haploid genomes in diploid and, especially, polyploid parthe-
nogenetic earthworms.
As stated earlier, there is a strong variation among parthenogenetic earthworms
regarding the type of parthenogenesis that is observed; most of the species are
automictic, but at least one is apomictic. Similarly, some species are pseudogamic
82 D.J. Dı
´
az Cosı
´
n et al.
while others are not; some lack spermathecae while others have an extra pair of
ovaries. The fact that parthenogenetic mechanisms are very labile in earthworms
provides strong evidence that parthenogens could have originated in a number of
different ways. Molecular biology will allow us to better understand why partheno-
genetic earthworms have been so successful.
5.4 Conclusion
Reproduction models in earthworms are much more variable than it could seem
a priori. Although direct cross-fertilization hermaphroditism may be seen as the
most usual model, it is common to find different ones as self-fertilization or
parthenogenesis. Even within the most widespread strategy, it is possib le to find
variations, such as presence of spermatophores.
During the last years, a great research effort has been made to shed light on some
aspects of sexual selection, such as mate assessment, copulatory behavior, and sperm
competition. Nevertheless, very interesting processes as origin and maintenance of
parthenogenesis in earthworms are mainly unknown. Deeper research on both aspects
would allow us to better understand the reproductive biology of these animals.
References
Ankel WE (1927) Neuere Arbeiten zur Zytologie der nat
€
urlichen Parthenogenese der Tiere.
Z Indikt Abstamm Vererbungsl 45:232–278
Bateman AJ (1948) Intra-sexual selection in Drosophila. J Hered 2:349–368
Beatty RA (1957) Parthenogenesis and polyploidy in mammalian development. Cambridge
University Press, London, p 134
Beatty RA (1967) Parthenogenesis in vertebrates. In: Metz CB, Monroy A (eds) Fertilization, vol I.
Academic, New York, pp 413–440
Blakemore RJ (1994) Earthworms of South East Queensland and their potential in brigalow soils.
PhD Thesis, University of Queensland
Blakemore RJ (1999) The diversity of exotic earthworms in Australia – a status report. In:
Ponder W, Lunney D (eds). Proceedings of “The other 99%” TRZS NSW, pp 182–187
Bonnet C (1762) Considerations sur les Corps Organise
´
s. Fayard, Tours, 1985:348
Bouche
´
MB (1975) La reproduction de Spermophorodrilus albanianus nov. Gen., nov. Spec.
(Lumbricidae) explique-t-elle la fonction des spermatophores? Zoologische Jahrb
€
ucher Abtei-
lung f
€
ur Systematique 102:1–11
Buckley TR, Attanayake D, Park D, Ravindran S, Jewell TR, Normark BB (2008) Investigating
hybridization in the parthenogenetic New Zealand stick insect Acanthoxyla (Phasmatodea)
using single-copy nuclear loci. Mol Phylogenet Evol 48:335–349
Butt KR, Nuutinen V (1998) Reproduction of the earthworm Lumbricus terrestris Linne
´
after the
first mating. Can J Zool 76:104–109
Cameron EK, Bayne EM, Coltman DW (2008) Genetic structure of invasive earthworms Den-
drobaena octaedra in the boreal forest of Alberta: insights into introduction mechanisms. Mol
Ecol 17:1189–1197
5 Reproduction of Earthworms: Sexual Selection and Parthenogenesis 83
Casellato S (1987) On polyploidy in Oligochates with particular reference to lumbricids. In:
Bonvicini AM, Omodeo P (eds) On earthworms. Mucchi, Modena, pp 75–87
Casellato S, Rodighiero R (1972) Karyology of Lumbricidae. 3rd contribution. Caryologia
25:513–524
Cobolli Sbordoni M, De Matthaeis E, Omodeo P, Bidoli R, and Rodino E (1987) Allozyme
variation and divergence between diploid and triploid populations of Allolobophora caliginosa
(Lumbricidae: Oligochaeta). In: Bonvicini Pagliai AM, Omodeo P (eds) On earthworms, pp.
53–74. Selected Symposia and Monographs U.Z.I., vol 2. Mucchi, Modena
Delmotte F, Sabater-Mun
˜
oz B, Prunier-Leterme N, Latorre A, Sunnucks P, Rispe C, Simon JC
(2003) Phylogenetic evidence for hybrid origins of asexual lineages in an aphid species.
Evolution 57:1291–1303
Domı
´
nguez J, Velando A, Aira M, Monroy F (2003) Uniparental reproduction of Eisenia fetida
and E. andrei (Oligochaeta: Lumbricidae): evidence of self insemination. Pedobiologia
47:530–534
Edwards CA, Bohlen PJ (1996) Biology and ecology of earthworms, 3rd edn. Chapman and Hall,
London, p 426
Ferna
´
ndez R, Novo M, Gutie
´
rrez M, Almodo
´
var A, Dı
´
az Cosı
´
n D (2010) Life cycle and reproduc-
tive traits in the earthworm Aporrectodea trapezoides (Duge
`
s, 1828) in laboratory cultures.
Pedobiologia 53:295–299
Field SG, Michiels NK (2005) Parasitism and growth in the earthworm Lumbricus terrestris:
fitness costs of the gregarine parasite Monocystis sp. Parasitology 130:1–7
Field SG, Schirp HJ, Michiels NK (2003) The influence of Monocystis sp infection on growth and
mating behaviour of the earthworm Lumbricus terrestris. Can J Zool 81:1161–1167
Garvı
´
n MH, Trigo D, Herna
´
ndez P, Dı
´
az Cosı
´
n DJ (2003) Gametogenesis and reproduction in
Hormogaster elisae (Oligochaeta, Hormogastridae). Inv Biol 122:152–157
Gates GE (1972) Contributions to North American earthworms. No. 3. IV. The trapezoides species
group. Bull Tall Timbers Res Stn 12:146
Gates GE (1974) Contributions to North American Earthworms. No. 10. Contributions to a
revision of the Lumbricidae X: Dendrobaena octaedra (Savigny) 1826 with special reference
to the importance of its parthenogenetic polymorphism for the importance for the classification
of earthworms. Bull Tall Timbers Res Stn 15:57
Grigoropoulou N, Butt KR, Lowe CN (2008) Effects on adult Lumbricus terrestris on cocoons and
hatchlings in Evans´ boxes. Pedobiologia 51:343–349
Grove AJ (1925) On the reproductive processes of the earthworm, Lumbricus terrestris.QJ
Microsc Sci 69:245–290
Grove AJ, Cowley LF (1926) On the reproductive processes of the brandling worm, Eisenia fetida
(Sav.). Q J Microsc Sci 70:559–581
Haimi J, Knott KE, Yliniemi I (2007) Does metal contamination affect clonal diversity of the
parthenogenetic earthworm Dendrobaena octaedra? Eur J Soil Boil 43:268–272
Hale CM, Frelich LE, Reich PB (2005) Exotic European earthworm invasion dynamics in northern
hardwood forest of Minnesota, USA. Ecol Appl 15:848–860
Heethoff M, Etzold K, Scheu S (2004) Mitochondrial COII sequences indicate that the partheno-
genetic earthworm Octolasion tyrtaeum (Savigny 1826) constitutes of two lineages differing in
body size and genotype. Pedobiologia 48:9–13
Hughes RN (1989) A functional biology of clonal animals. Chapman and Hall, London, p 330
ICZN (1999) International code of zoological nomenclature (4th edition). International Trust for
Zoological Nomenclature, c/o Natural History Museum, London, p 306
Jaenicke J, Selander RK (1979) Evolution and ecology of parthenogenesis in earthworms. Am
Zool 19:729–737
Jaenicke J, Parker ED, Selander RK (1980) Clonal niche structure in the parthenogenetic earth-
worm Octolasion tyrtaeum
. Am Nat 116:196–205
Jamieson BGM (1992) Oligochaeta. In: Harrison FW, Gardiner SL (eds) Miscroscopic Anatomy
of Invertebrates, vol 7. Wiley-Liss, New York
84 D.J. Dı
´
az Cosı
´
n et al.
Jamieson BGM (2006) Non leech Clitellata. In: Rouse GW, Pleijel F (eds) Reproductive biology
and phylogeny of Annelida. SP Science Publishers, USA, p 688
King RA, Tibble AL, Symodson WOC (2008) Opening a can of worms: unprecedented sympatric
cryptic diversity within British lumbricid earthworms. Mol Ecol 17:4684–4698
Koene JM, Sundermann G, Michiels N (2002) On the function of body piercing during copulation
in earthworms. Invert Reprod Develop 41:35–40
Koene JM, Pfoertner T, Michiels NK (2005) Piercing the partner’s skin influences sperm uptake in
the earthworm Lumbricus terrestris. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 59:243–249
Ligthart TN, Peek GJCW (1997) Evolution of earthworm burrow systems after inoculation of
lumbricid earthworms in a pasture in the Netherlands. Soil Biol Biochem 29:453–462
Marin
˜
o MF, Velando A, Domı
´
nguez J (2006) Do earthworms trade sperm? The 8th International
Symposium on Earthworm Ecology Krakow Poland, 4–9 September 2006. Sesion 5 Behavioral
and Evolutionary Biology. p 149
Mayr E (1963) Animal species and evolution. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, p 797
Meyer WJ, Bowman H (1994) Mating period and cocoon production in Eisenia fetida. The 5th
International Symposium on Earthworm Ecology Columbus Ohio, 5–9 July 1994. p 128
Michiels NK (1998) Mating conflicts and sperm competition in simultaneous hermaphrodites. In:
Birkhead R, Moller AP (eds) Sperm competition and sexual selection. Academic, London,
pp 219–254
Michiels NK, Hohner A, Vorndran IC (2001) Precopulatory mate assessment in relation to body
size in the earthworm Lumbricus terrestris: avoidance of dangerous liaisons? Behav Ecol
12:612–618
Monroy F, Aira M, Velando A, Domı
´
nguez J (2003) Have spermatophores in Eisenia fetida
(Oligochaeta, Lumbricidae) any reproductive role? Pedobiologia 47:526–529
Monroy F, Aira M, Velando A (2005) Size-assortative mating in the earthworm Eisenia fetida
(Oligochaeta, Lumbricidae). J Ethol 23:69–70
Muldal S (1952) The chromosomes of the earthworms I. The evolution of polyploidy. Heredity
6:55–76
Novo M, Almodo
´
var A, Ferna
´
ndez R, Gutie
´
rrez M, Dı
´
az Cosı
´
n DJ (in press) Mate choice of an
endogeic earthworm revealed by microsatellite markers. doi:10.1016/j.pedobi.2010.07.002
Nuutinen V, Butt KR (1997) The mating behaviour of the earthworm Lumbricus terrestris
(Oligochaeta: Lumbricidae). J Zool Lond 242:783–798
Olive PJW, Clark RB (1978) Physiology of reproduction. In: Mill PJ (ed) Physiology of annelids.
Academic, London, pp 271–368
Omodeo P (1951) Corredo cromosomico e spermatogenesi aberrante in Allolobophora caliginosa
trapezoides. Boll Zool 18:27–39
Omodeo P (1952) Cariologia dei lumbricidae. Caryologia 4:173–178
Omodeo P (1953) Specie e razze poliploidi nei lombrichi. Convegno di Genetica, Ricerca
Scientifica 23, Suppl 43.9
Ortiz-Ceballos A, Fragoso C (2006) Parental care of endogeic earthworm cocoons: is cleaning,
construction, and cast surrounding of chambers related to hatching and survival of juvenile
worms? The 8th International Symposium on Earthworm Ecology Krakow Poland, 4–9
September 2006. Session 5 Behavioral and Evolutionary Biology. p 150
Owen R (1849) On parthenogenesis, or the successive production of procreating individuals from a
single ovum. John van Voorst, London
Parker GA (1970) Sperm competition and its evolutionary consequences in insects. Biol Rev
45:525–567
Porto PG, Velando A, Dominguez J. (2008) Effects of mating frequency on sex allocation in the
simultaneously hermaphroditic redworm (Eisenia andrei). The 15th International Colloquium
on Soil Zoology Curitiba Brazil, 25–29 August 2008. Session 1 Soil Animal Biodiversity: the
final frontier. S1T1P14
Qiu JP, Bouche
´
MB (1998) Contribution to the taxonomy of Hormogastridae (Annelida:
Oligochaeta) with description of new species from Spain. Doc Pedozool Integro 4:164–177
5 Reproduction of Earthworms: Sexual Selection and Parthenogenesis 85
Reynolds JW (1974) Are oligochaetes really hermaphroditic anphimictic organisms? Biologist
56:90–99
Richards KS, Fleming TP (1982) Spermatozoal phagocytosis by the spermathecae of Dendro-
baena subrubicunda and other lumbricids (Oligochaeta, Annelida). Int J Invert Rep 5:233–241
Sahm S, Velavan TP, Schulenburg H, Michiels NK (2009) Reconstruction of mating history – a
retrospective analysis of Lumbricus terrestris mate choice criteria in natural populations. In:
Velavan TP (ed) Population genetics of host–parasite interactions in Lumbricus terrestris and
Monocystis sp (Apicomplexa: Gregarinea). Phd Thesis, T
€
ubingen University, Germany, pp
43–57
Sims RW, Gerard BM (1999) Earthworms, notes for the identification of British species. In:
Barnes RSK, Crothers JH (eds) Synopses of the British fauna (new series), no. 31 revised. Field
Studies Council, Shrewsbury
Suomalainen E (1950) Parthenogenesis in animals. Adv Genet 3:193–253
Suomalainen E, Saura A, Lokki J (1987) Cytology and evolution in parthenogenesis. CRC, Boca
Rato
´
n, p 216
Tato A, Velando A, Dominguez J (2006) Influence of size and partner preference on the female
body function of the earthworm Eisenia andrei (Oligochaeta, Lumbricidae). Eur J Soil Biol 42:
S331–S333
Tembe VB, Dubash PJ (1961) The earthworms: a review. J Bombay Nat Hist Soc 58:171–201
Terhivuo J, Saura A (1993) Genic and morphological variation of the parthenogenetic earthworm
Aporrectodea rosea in southern Finland (Oligochaeta, Lumbricidae). Am Zool Fennici
30:215–224
Terhivuo J, Saura A (1996) Clone pool structure and morphometric variation in endogeic and
epigeic North-European pathenogenetic earthworms (Oligochaeta: Lumbricidae). Pedobiolo-
gia 40:226–239
Terhivuo J, Saura A (2003) Low clonal diversity and morphometrics in the parthenogenetic
earthworm Octolasion cyaneum. Pedobiologia 47:434–439
Thomsen M (1927) Studien
€
uber die Parthenogenese bei einigen Cocciden und Aleurodinen.
Z Zellforsch Mikrosk Anat 5:1–10
Thornhill R (1983) Cryptic female choice and its implications in the scorpionfly Harpobittacus
nigriceps. Am Nat 122:765–788
Van Praagh BD (1995) Reproductive biology of Megascolides australis McCoy (Oligochaeta:
Megascolecidae). Aust J Zool 43:489–507
Varuta AT, More NK (1972) Cytochemical study of mucus and mucus secreting cells in sper-
mathecae of the earthworms, Pheretima elongata (Perrier) and Hoplochaetella powelli
(Michaelsen). Ind Exp Biol 10:239–241
Velando A, Domı
´
nguez J, Ferreiro A (2006) Inbreeding and outbreeding reduces cocoon produc-
tion in the earthworm Eisenia andrei. Eur J Soil Biol 42:S354–S357
Velando A, Eiroa J, Dominguez J (2008) Brainless but not clueless: earthworms boost their
ejaculates when they detect fecund non-virgin partners. Proc R Soc B 275:1067–1072
Victorov AG (1997) Diversity of polyploid races in the family Lumbricidae. Soil Biol Biochem
29:217–221
Vyas I, Dev B (1972) Histochemical localization of alkaline phosphatase in the spermathecae of
the earthworm, Barogaster annandalei (Stephenson). Acta Histochem 42:344–350
Wallwork JA (1983) Earthworm biology. Camelot, Southhamton
White MJD (1973) Animal cytology and evolution. Cambridge University Press, London, p 961
86 D.J. Dı
´
az Cosı
´
n et al.
