Skip to main content
. 2022 May 11;289(1974):20220492. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2022.0492

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Effect of bacterial infections on female sexual receptivity. (a,h) Virgin female CS flies were injected with three different non-pathogenic (a) and pathogenic (h) strains and tested in a single pair courtship assay with an uninfected male. (b) Copulation latency and (e) mating success of females infected with ECC15 and their respective controls (n = 20–24). (c) Copulation latency and (f) mating success of females infected with E. coli and their respective controls (n = 19–20). (d) Copulation latency and (g) mating success of males infected with M. luteus and their respective controls (n = 31–32). (i) Copulation latency and (l) mating success of females infected with S. marcescens and their respective controls (n = 16–19). (j) Copulation latency and (m) mating success of females infected with S. aureus and their respective controls (n = 19–20). (k) Copulation latency and (n) mating success of females infected with L. monocytogenes and their respective controls (n = 20–21). Dunn's test in (bd), (ij) and Fisher's test in (eg), (ln). Copulation latency is measured in seconds and mating success is presented as percentage. A detailed description of the statistics employed can be found in the electronic supplementary material. (Online version in colour.)