# Sperm retention



## Anyfoot (May 12, 2017)

How long after copulation can a female still produce fertile eggs? Does the time length differ between species?


----------



## wellington (May 12, 2017)

I believe the time does vary some between species. I have always heard 5 and 7 years.


----------



## Kapidolo Farms (May 12, 2017)

I think the first record of this ...
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1437776?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

Saying it's sperm storage...
http://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.ed...=Oviductal_sperm_storage_as_a_reproductiv.pdf

Directly to answer your question there are many factors that influence the length of time which sperm may still be capable of fertilization. There are a few accounts of multiple paternity in turtles and tortoises which sorta indicates there is no sperm competition.


----------



## Tom (May 12, 2017)

Me and several other keepers have observed that sulcatas can only store it for a few months and fertility drops off quickly.

I've heard multiple stories of leopards storing it for 5+ years.

I don't know about any other species, but given the above, I would guess it will vary a lot.


----------



## Anyfoot (May 13, 2017)

I've often wondered if the species sperm retention ability is linked to it's conditions. 

For example a hibernating species(maybe med species) has less time to find a mate, lay eggs and hatch the eggs in one yr, the sperm part of the job could have been done the yr(s) before. 
Then there are solitary tortoises(maybe sullies,Leo's) that may go a full season without seeing a mate. It would make sense these can hold sperm for a lengthy time to ensure the species carries on. 
Then there are species that endure year round warm weather and live in herds (redfoots). Is there really a need for these to retain sperm for ? 

I find it amazing that for example a leapord could hold sperm for 5+ yrs and then the eggs undergo cooling and incubation periods. We are talking around 6 or 7 yrs from copulation that neonates could still hatch.


----------



## Anyfoot (May 13, 2017)

Will said:


> I think the first record of this ...
> http://www.jstor.org/stable/1437776?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
> 
> Saying it's sperm storage...
> ...


 Cheers Will. I'll have a read. Your 2nd link doesn't show anything.


----------

