In the mid‐20th century, two Swedish biologists—Åke Franzén and Bjorn Afzelius—significantly advanced the study of sperm biology through the investigation of sperm ultrastructure using the newly developed electron microscope. Franzén studied sperm in some 200 (mostly marine) invertebrate species, linking sperm form and structure to the fertilization environment. Most notably, Franzén found that sperm of external fertilizers were relatively small and of the “primitive” type, while animals with internal sperm transfer tended to have more elongated and modified sperm morphologies (Franzén l955, 1956a, 1956b). In similarly ground‐breaking work, Afzelius provided the first documentation of pores in the sperm nucleus membrane, the first high‐magnification image of the acrosome reaction, and discovered the dynein arms on the microtubule doublets of the sperm flagellum, the latter providing clues to the mechanism of sperm motility (Afzelius, 1957, 1959). These findings stimulated research on sperm structure and function, prompted the use of sperm ultrastructure as a phylogenetic and taxonomic tool, and motivated investigations of the role of cilia and flagella in human disease.

Given the striking variation in sperm size and shape observed across the animal kingdom—the sperm cell is now recognized as the most diverse cell type known (Pitnick, Hosken, & Birkhead, 2009)—it is perhaps not surprising that there is still much to learn. Indeed, the desire to understand sperm structure and function that drove Franzén and Afzelius still motivates researchers today. The biology of spermatozoa (BoS) meetings were established in the early 1990's by Tim Birkhead and Harry Moore, both from the University of Sheffield, as a forum to advance knowledge of sperm biology, through the exchange of ideas across a range of disciplines including evolutionary biology, cell physiology, and human reproductive health. As an added bonus, these biennial meetings took place in the beautiful English countryside of the Peak District.

In 2019, BoS moved to the Swedish town of Nynäshamn for the 15th BoS meeting. Under the direction of the international steering committee—comprised of Rhonda Snook (Stockholm University), John Fitzpatrick (Stockholm University), David Hosken (University of Exeter), Scott Pitnick (Syracuse University), Lukas Schärer (University of Basel), and Nina Wedell (University of Exeter)—this new venue was a resounding success. All the things that have made previous BoS meetings so successful were carried over to Sweden. With no concurrent sessions and presentations focused on unpublished and in‐progress research with 15 min allocated to discussion, the meeting provided the perfect environment for the cross‐fertilization of research ideas and discussion of emerging topics and methodologies. BoS15 also continued the tradition of inviting 2–3 speakers whose research offers new perspectives and approaches from other disciplines. An amazing scientific program, combined with a venue that allowed for discussion long into the night and a walk along the beautiful Nynäshamn coast, meant that BoS15 was the perfect blend of the old and the new.

Kicking off the BoS15 scientific program, Tim Birkhead (University of Sheffield) transitioned the 80 BoS delegates from the Peak District of England to the Swedish coastal town of Nynäshamn with the greatest of ease with his opening plenary talk. By first acknowledging the contributions of Franzén and Afzelius to sperm biology, it was almost as if BoS was “back home again.” Birkhead then took us on a stroll down memory lane, reliving the highlights of BoS over the years and reminding attendees of why this meeting is just so good, and the reasons for why we all keep coming back. It has been said by many a BoS attendee, that this meeting is their favorite professional conference. The warm and welcoming environment, provided by the steering committee and attendees, makes this conference feel like a family “catch‐up,” not to mention the high‐quality research presented and thought‐provoking new ideas that keep the study of gamete biology moving forward in new directions. Once bitten by a BoS meeting, there is no turning back.

The 15th BoS meeting merged the old and the new in more ways than one. Following in the footsteps of Frankén and Afzelius, several talks focused on explaining the causes and consequences of sperm variation. Kristin Hook (University of Maryland) combined electron microscopy with computer‐assisted‐sperm‐analysis methods to unravel the functional significance of complex sperm morphology and sperm aggregate behavior, as well as the role female promiscuity plays in the evolution of these traits. Using modern phylogenetic and evolutionary analysis methods, Ariel Kahrl (Stockholm University) shed new light on the role of the fertilisation environment for the evolution of sperm size. Compiling data on more than 3,000 animal species, this work linked evolutionary transitions in fertilisation environment to shifts in both sperm size and the rate of sperm evolution, providing compelling evidence for the evolution of longer sperm, and a higher rate of evolutionary change in sperm size in internally fertilizing taxa compared with those with external fertilisation. Exemplifying the community nature of these BoS meeting, Kahrl et al plan to make this resource publicly available in the future (SpermTree.org). Finally, Sara Calhim (University of Jyvaskyla) reminded us of how much more we have to learn about sperm variation and the benefit of studying “novel” animal groups by introducing to us the weird and wonderful world of tardigrade sperm. Sperm with no apparent mitochondria or floating mitochondria. Sperm with baton, spiral, or filamentous head shapes. Not to mention the morphological changes sperm undergo when they are inside the female versus in the male testis. Importantly, anyone can contribute to this work by sending samples of moss (the home to these little water bears) to Calhim. Check out how to do that here: https://tinyurl.com/sendusyourmoss.

Like many BoS meetings before this one, the focus was not entirely on sperm. This was exemplified by the plenary talk “The other gamete: development and evolution of eggs, inside and out” by Cassandra Extavour (Harvard University). Extavour presented an incredible collection of data on egg size and shape variation in insects, where egg volume ranges across eight orders of magnitude, and demonstrated the link between the evolution of egg morphological diversity and ecology (Church, Donoughe, de Medeiros, & Extavour, 2019a). For example, where eggs are laid helps to explain egg variation, with eggs laid in or on water or in the bodies of other animals tending to be smaller, while eggs laid on soil tend to be larger. Reflecting the movement towards open science, Extavour et al have made this database publicly available (Church, Donoughe, de Medeiros, & Extavour, 2019b). Extavour also described how insect embryos are built; detailing years of collaborative research from her lab investigating nuclei movement within the cytoplasm during blastoderm formation and impressing us with videos of nuclei movement captured using long‐term cell tracking. Female diversity was also the topic of Patty Brennan's talk (Mount Holyoke College), who showcased vaginal diversity in dolphins and discussed the potential roles of natural and sexual selection in shaping vaginal morphology. Intriguingly, this variation in vaginal morphology does not appear to be explained by phylogeny, but instead appears likely to reflect the coevolution of male and female genital morphology and may provide a mechanism by which females can regulate copulatory success.

Since the early days of the BoS meetings, researchers have understood the need to better integrate female‐mediated processes into the study of sperm biology and sperm competition (Pitnick & Karr, 1995). The 15th BoS meeting showed how far we have come, with the presented research demonstrating our greater understanding of the dynamic interactions between ejaculates and the female reproductive tract and/or reproductive fluids. We now know that the female reproductive tract provides a selective and interactive environment through which sperm must navigate. Several talks highlighted the role that postmating female–male interactions play on sperm function, female behavior, and, ultimately, reproductive success. These complex interactions were the focus of the first day's plenary talk by Sabine Koelle (University College in Dublin), whose research focuses on reproductive medicine and assisted reproductive technologies in humans. Koelle wowed us all with her videos of sperm swimming within the female reproductive tract under near “in vivo” conditions, which were obtained using a newly developed technique—probe‐based confocal laser endomicroscopy. Koelle's work evoked a great deal of discussion throughout the meeting. This work highlighted the fact that a sperm's journey to the oocyte may be even more complicated than previously thought, questioning the importance of sperm motility versus female reproductive tract contractions for sperm transport. Additionally, Koelle's work suggested fertilization success may be more dependent upon an intact sperm membrane, rather than normal sperm morphology. This is because damage to the membrane impedes the ability of sperm to locate the oocyte. Therefore assessing sperm membrane integrity may be an important assessment tool when investigating idiopathic infertility for humans and animals. Also highlighting the importance of male–female interactions, Emma Whittington (Syracuse University) described how the Drosophila melanogaster sperm proteome changes after being transferred to the female. Whittington provided a framework for thinking about the interactive role the female reproductive tract and fluids play in post‐ejaculatory modifications to sperm. Next, Yasir Ahmed‐Braimah (Syracuse University), created a vibrant discussion about postmating immune responses. Ahmed‐Braimah demonstrated that mating triggers immune responses in the female reproductive tract, with ejaculates from heterospecific males mounting a greater immune response than conspecific ejaculates.

Nathan Clark's plenary talk (University of Utah) showed us that male–female interactions in the cabbage white butterfly can be a veritable “battle of the sexes.” In this system, males deposit a large spermatophore, which consists of a virtually indestructible hard outer shell with a soft nutritious inner shell surrounding a ball of sperm, in the female reproductive tract (bursa copulatrix). The spermatophore's nutritious inner shell acts as a nuptial gift. However, because the female cannot mate when the bursa copulatrix is filled and it takes 3 days for the female to break down the hard outer shell of the spermatophore, the spermatophore functions to prevent female remating. To combat this, female butterflies produce proteases in the bursa copulatrix which help to chemically digest the spermatophore and, even more impressively, the bursa copulatrix contains an organ called the signum, “a tooth‐like structure” which mechanically chews through the spermatophore's outer shell. To top it off, Clark demonstrated that both the female proteases and male spermatophore proteins are rapidly evolving. Altogether, this was an amazing story of sexual conflict and cooperation.

Male–female interactions are also critical in external fertilizers. Neil Gemmell (University of Otago) highlighted the importance of female–male interactions as the ovarian fluid, surrounding the unfertilized ova, contains proteins that can speed up or slow down the sperm from “hooknose” male chinook salmon. Similarly, using a broadcast spawner, the blue mussel, Jon Evans (University of Western Australia) showed that female derived water surrounding the eggs, can also hinder or enhance the sperm function. Egg water acts as a chemoattract to guide sperm, but also acts to select against extreme combinations of sperm length and sperm swimming speed.

Sperm function and performance can also be influenced by seminal fluid, setting the stage for complex male–male interactions within the female reproductive tract. This was beautifully demonstrated by Mariana Wolfner (Cornell University), who intrigued us with her research on Drosophila seminal fluid and the idea of copulation complementation. It seems that Drosophila males exploit seminal fluid sex‐peptides produced by rival males, with the second male to mate effectively “rescuing” the first male's fertility. Stefan Lüpold (University of Zurich) moved the conversation forward again by elegantly demonstrating the complexities of male–male–female interactions and highlighting the multivariate nature of selection on sperm form and function.

The environment also impacts reproduction, and several talks on the final afternoon focused on the consequences of changes in the thermal environment for gamete biology and fertility or the impact of social environment on reproductive plasticity. Ramakrishnan Vasudeva (University of East Anglia) showed that temperature increases through adult development resulted in males producing shorter sperm and females producing larger eggs. Moreover, Vasudeva found that this gamete plasticity is adaptive, with pairs showing greater reproductive performance when males and females were exposed to matching thermal conditions. Next up, Benjamin Walsh (University of Liverpool) introduced the concept of “thermal fertility limits” (i.e., the level and duration of thermal stress that renders individuals unable to reproduce; Walsh et al., 2019). Walsh reviewed empirical evidence for the effects of elevated temperatures on reproduction and fertility and recommended the use of standardized approaches to measuring thermal fertility limits. Given that rising global temperatures and increases in the frequency and duration of heatwave events are threatening biodiversity on a global scale, this work is timely and impactful. Finally, the presentation sessions were wrapped up by Suzanne Alonzo (University of California Santa Cruz) who reminded us of the “social side” of sperm competition. Alzono discussed how social and gametic traits in the ocellated wrasse, whereby males exhibit three alternative male reproductive types, interact to help us understand the dynamics of sexual selection. In this species, male types differ in sperm quantity and quality; the next big question is whether they also differ in cognitive function.

As in previous years, the poster sessions were a critical component of BoS15. Kicking of each of the two posters sessions, presenters “advertised” their posters with a 1‐min research pitch that infused a generous dose of fun into the sessions, and John Fitzpatrick was poised nearby with the timer to catch out anyone who went over the 1‐min mark. The posters showcased a diversity of high‐quality research covering a broad range of topics, including cognitive mechanisms of sperm allocation in junglefowl (Yunke Wang, University of Oxford), environmental effects on sperm gene expression (Rowan Lymbery, University of Western Australia), and sperm adaptation to microbes (Oliver Otti, University of Bayreuth). The female side of reproduction was also well‐represented, with posters covering topics such as female reproductive tract protein evolution in Drosophila (Caitlin McDonough, Syracuse University) and the role of female body condition on cryptic female choice via ovarian fluid in wrasse (Matthew Kustra, University of California, Santa Cruz). Finally, several of this year's posters highlighted research on postmating prezygotic reproductive barriers in a range of invertebrate systems, including butterflies (Melissa Plakke, University of Kansas), Drosophila (Martin Garlovsky, University of Sheffield), and beetles (Erica Larson, University of Denver).

Alas, after three and a half days of cutting‐edge science and rousing discussion, our meeting was over, and a merry group of gamete biologists farewelled each other and commenced their journey home. We are already looking forward to the next meeting, which will again be held in Nynäshamn on September 6–10th, 2021 (https://www.su.se/zoologi/english/research/conferences/welcome‐to‐bos). Though BoS meetings are typically small, with just 60–80 delegates, new attendees are always welcome and encouraged to inject new ideas and enthusiasm for the study of sperm biology. So mark down the dates for the 16th BoS meeting in your calendar now.

在20世纪中叶，两位瑞典生物学家ÅkeFranzén和Bjorn Afzelius通过使用最新开发的电子显微镜研究精子超微结构，极大地推动了精子生物学的研究。Franzén研究了大约200种（主要是海洋）无脊椎动物的精子，将精子的形态和结构与受精环境联系在一起。最值得注意的是，弗朗兹（Franzén）发现，外部肥料的精子相对较小，属于“原始”类型，而具有内部精子转移的动物往往具有更细长和修饰的精子形态（Franzén，1955年，1956a，1956b）。）。在类似的开创性工作中，Afzelius提供了精子核膜孔的第一个文献资料，是顶体反应的第一个高倍放大图像，并在精子鞭毛的微管双合体上发现了动力蛋白臂，后者为寻找精子提供了线索。精子运动的机制（Afzelius，1957年，1959年）。这些发现刺激了对精子结构和功能的研究，促使人们将精子超微结构用作系统发育和分类学工具，并激发了纤毛和鞭毛在人类疾病中的作用的研究。

鉴于在整个动物界观察到的精子大小和形状发生了惊人的变化，精子细胞现在被认为是已知最多样化的细胞类型（Pitnick，Hosken和Birkhead，2009年）。）—仍然有很多东西要学习，这不足为奇。确实，了解驱使弗朗兹（Franzén）和阿夫泽里乌斯（Afzelius）的精子结构和功能的渴望，今天仍然激励着研究人员。谢菲尔德大学的蒂姆·伯克黑德和哈里·摩尔在1990年代初建立了精子生物学（BoS）会议，通过交流包括进化论在内的多种学科的思想，作为提高精子生物学知识的论坛生物学，细胞生理学和人类生殖健康。另外，这些两年一次的会议在美丽的英国峰区乡村举行。

BoS于2019年移居瑞典小镇Nynäshamn，参加第15届BoS会议。在国际指导委员会的指导下-由Rhonda Snook（斯德哥尔摩大学），John Fitzpatrick（斯德哥尔摩大学），David Hosken（埃克塞特大学），Scott Pitnick（锡拉丘兹大学），LukasSchärer（巴塞尔大学）和Nina组成Wedell（埃克塞特大学）—这个新场所取得了巨大的成功。以前的BoS会议取得如此成功的所有因素都被转移到了瑞典。由于没有同时进行的会议和演讲集中在未发表和进行中的研究上，分配了15分钟的讨论时间，因此该会议为研究思想的交叉应用以及对新兴主题和方法论的讨论提供了理想的环境。BoS15还延续了邀请2-3位演讲者的传统，他们的研究提供了其他学科的新观点和新方法。令人惊叹的科学程序，加上可以进行深夜讨论的场所以及沿着美丽的Nynäshamn海岸散步，意味着BoS15是新旧之间的完美融合。

在启动BoS15科学计划后，谢菲尔德大学的蒂姆·伯克黑德（Tim Birkhead）在开幕致辞中最大程度地放松了工作，将80名BoS代表从英格兰峰区转移到了瑞典沿海城市Nynäshamn。首先承认弗朗兹（Franzén）和阿夫泽留斯（Afzelius）对精子生物学的贡献，仿佛BoS似乎“又回到了家”。然后，伯克黑德（Birkhead）带我们走上了记忆的小路，回顾了多年来BoS的亮点，并提醒与会人员为什么这次会议是如此的好，以及为什么我们都回来了。BoS的许多与会者都说过，这次会议是他们最喜欢的专业会议。指导委员会和与会人员提供了热情友好的环境，使这次会议感觉就像是家庭的“追赶，”更不用说提出的高质量研究和发人深省的新思想，这些思想使配子生物学的研究朝着新的方向发展。一旦被BoS会议咬伤，就没有回头路可走。

第15届BoS会议将新旧合并的方式多于一次。跟随弗兰肯（Frankén）和阿夫泽留斯（Afzelius）的脚步，几场讲座着重于解释精子变异的原因和后果。克里斯汀·胡克（Kristin Hook）（马里兰大学）将电子显微镜与计算机辅助的精子分析方法结合起来，揭示了复杂精子形态和精子聚集行为的功能意义，以及女性滥交在这些性状演变中的作用。使用现代的系统进化分析方法，Ariel Kahrl（斯德哥尔摩大学）为受精环境在精子大小演变中的作用提供了新的思路。收集有关3,000多种动物的数据，这项工作将受精环境中的进化转变与精子大小和精子进化率的变化联系在一起，为内部受精类群的精子大小演化和与外部精子相比更高的精子大小进化变化率提供了令人信服的证据。受精。为了说明这些BoS会议的社区性质，Kahrl等人计划在将来使该资源公开可用（SpermTree.org）。最后，萨拉·卡利姆（Jyvaskyla大学）让我们想起了我们还需要了解多少关于精子变异的知识，以及向我们介绍tardigrade精子怪异而奇妙的世界，研究“新颖”动物群的益处。精子没有明显的线粒体或漂浮的线粒体。精子具棒状，螺旋状或丝状头部。更不用说精子在雌性和雄性睾丸中时发生的形态变化。重要的是，任何人都可以通过将苔藓样本（这些小水熊的家）寄给Calhim来为这项工作做出贡献。在此处查看操作方法：https：//tinyurl.com/sendusyourmoss。

像在此之前举行的许多BoS会议一样，焦点并不完全集中在精子上。Cassandra Extavour（哈佛大学）在全体会议上发表的题为“另一种配子：鸡蛋的内在和外在发展和进化”的例子就说明了这一点。Extavour提供了令人难以置信的昆虫卵大小和形状变化的数据，卵的体积跨越八个数量级，并展示了卵形态多样性与生态学之间的联系（Church，Donoughe，de Medeiros和＆Extavour，2019年）。例如，产卵的地方有助于解释卵的变异，产在水中或水中或其他动物体内的卵往往较小，而产在土壤上的卵则较大。为了反映开放科学的发展趋势，Extavour等人将该数据库公开发布（Church，Donoughe，de Medeiros和Extavour，2019b）。Extavour还描述了昆虫胚胎是如何构建的。她的实验室详细研究了多年的合作研究，研究了胚盘形成过程中细胞质内的细胞核运动，并用长期细胞跟踪捕获的细胞核运动视频给我们留下了深刻的印象。女性多样性也是帕蒂·布伦南（Patty Brennan）演讲的主题（霍利奥克山学院），他展示了海豚的阴道多样性，并讨论了自然选择和性选择在塑造阴道形态方面的潜在作用。有趣的是，这种阴道形态的变化似乎不能用系统发育学来解释，而是可能反映出男性和女性生殖器形态的共同进化，并且可以提供一种女性调节交配成功的机制。

自BoS会议开始以来，研究人员就认识到有必要将女性介导的过程更好地整合到精子生物学和精子竞争研究中（Pitnick＆Karr，1995）。）。第15届BoS会议展示了我们已经走了多远，目前的研究表明我们对射精与女性生殖道和/或生殖液之间的动态相互作用有了更深入的了解。现在我们知道，女性生殖道提供了精子必须通过的选择性和互动环境。几个演讲强调了推迟男女之间的相互作用对精子功能，女性行为以及最终生殖成功的作用。这些复杂的相互作用是Sabine Koelle（都柏林大学学院）在第一天全体会议上的重点，他的研究重点是生殖医学和人类辅助生殖技术。Koelle用在近“体内”条件下在女性生殖道内精子游动的视频向我们所有人赞叹，这些视频是使用新开发的基于探头的共聚焦激光内窥镜技术获得的。在整个会议期间，Koelle的工作引起了很多讨论。这项工作强调了一个事实，即精子到达卵母细胞的过程可能比以前认为的还要复杂，这对精子运动性与女性生殖道收缩对于精子运输的重要性提出了质疑。另外，Koelle的工作表明受精成功可能更多地取决于完整的精子膜，而不是正常的精子形态。这是因为对膜的损害阻碍了精子定位卵母细胞的能力。因此，在研究人类和动物的特发性不育症时，评估精子膜的完整性可能是重要的评估工具。锡拉丘兹大学的艾玛·惠廷顿（Emma Whittington）强调了男女互动的重要性，他介绍了果蝇黑腹精子蛋白质组被转移到女性后发生变化。惠廷顿提供了一个框架，用于思考女性生殖道和体液在射精后对精子的调节中的相互作用。接下来，锡拉丘兹大学（Syracuse University）的Yasir Ahmed‐Braimah发起了有关推迟免疫反应的充满活力的讨论。艾哈迈德·布赖玛（Ahmed-Braimah）证明，交配会触发雌性生殖道的免疫反应，异种雄性的射精比同种性的射精具有更大的免疫反应。

内森·克拉克（Nathan Clark）的全会讲话（犹他大学）向我们表明，白菜白蝴蝶中的男女互动可以说是名副其实的“性别之战”。在这个系统中，雄性在雌性生殖道中沉积了一个大的精子，其由几乎坚不可摧的硬外壳和围绕着精子的营养丰富的软壳组成。精子营养丰富的内壳充当了结婚礼物。但是，由于在填充法氏囊时雌性不能交配，并且雌性需要3天才能分解精子的坚硬外壳，所以精子的功能是防止雌性再交配。为了解决这个问题，雌性蝴蝶在法氏囊中产生蛋白酶，有助于化学消化精子，甚至更令人印象深刻的是，法氏囊包含一个叫做“信号体”的器官，是一种“齿状结构”，可以机械地咀嚼穿过精子的外壳。最重要的是，Clark证明了雌性蛋白酶和雄性精子蛋白都在迅速发展。总之，这是一个关于性冲突和性合作的惊人故事。

男女相互作用在外用肥料中也很重要。奥塔哥大学的尼尔·盖梅尔（Neil Gemmell）强调了雌雄相互作用的重要性，因为未受精卵周围的卵巢液中含有可以使“钩鼻”雄性奇努克鲑鱼精子加速或减慢的蛋白质。同样，使用贻贝繁殖的蓝贻贝，西澳大利亚大学的乔恩·埃文斯（Jon Evans）表明，卵周围的雌性雌性水也可以阻碍或增强精子的功能。卵水可作为引导精子的趋化性，但也可以选择对抗精子长度和精子游动速度的极端组合。

精液的功能也可能影响精子的功能，从而为女性生殖道内复杂的男性与男性相互作用奠定基础。康奈尔大学的玛丽安娜·沃尔夫纳（Mariana Wolfner）很好地证明了这一点，她对果蝇精液的研究以及交配补充的想法引起了我们的兴趣。果蝇雄性似乎利用了敌对雄性产生的精液性肽，而第二个雄性交配有效地“拯救”了第一个雄性的繁殖力。StefanLüpold（苏黎世大学）优雅地展示了男女之间相互作用的复杂性，并强调了精子形式和功能的多元选择，再次推动了对话的发展。

环境也影响生殖，最后一个下午的几场讲座集中讨论了热环境变化对配子生物学和生殖力的影响，或社会环境对生殖可塑性的影响。Ramakrishnan Vasudeva（东安格利亚大学）表明，成年后温度升高导致雄性产生的精子减少，雌性产生的卵变大。此外，Vasudeva发现，这种配子可塑性具有适应性，当雄性和雌性暴露于匹配的热条件下时，成对的配子表现出更高的繁殖性能。接下来，利物浦大学的本杰明·沃尔什（Benjamin Walsh）提出了“热生育极限”的概念（即，使个体无法繁殖的热应激水平和持续时间； Walsh等，2019年）。沃尔什（Walsh）回顾了高温对生殖和生育力影响的经验证据，并建议使用标准化方法来测量热生育力限值。鉴于全球气温上升以及热浪事件的频率和持续时间的增加正在威胁全球范围内的生物多样性，这项工作是及时和有影响力的。最后，演讲环节由加利福尼亚圣克鲁斯大学的Suzanne Alonzo总结，他使我们想起了精子竞争的“社会方面”。阿尔佐诺（Alzono）讨论了有眼的濑鱼的社会和配偶特征如何相互作用，从而使男性表现出三种替代的男性生殖类型，从而帮助我们了解性选择的动态。在这个物种中，雄性类型的精子数量和质量有所不同。

与往年一样，海报发布会也是BoS15的重要组成部分。在两个发布者会议中，每位主持人都踢了一下，主持人以1分钟的研究宣传“广告”了他们的海报，为会议带来了无限的乐趣，约翰·菲茨帕特里克（John Fitzpatrick）被安排在附近，准备好赶上所有经过该发布会的人。 1分钟标记。海报展示了涵盖广泛主题的各种高质量研究，包括丛林鸟精子分配的认知机制（牛津大学的尤肯·王），环境对精子基因表达的影响（西澳大利亚大学的罗万·林伯里），和精子对微生物的适应性（拜罗伊特大学的奥利弗·奥蒂）。生殖的女性方面也得到了很好的体现，海报涵盖了诸如女性生殖道蛋白质进化等主题。果蝇（锡拉丘兹大学（Syracuse University）凯特琳·麦克唐纳（Caitlin McDonough））以及女性身体状况在濑鱼中通过卵巢液进行隐性女性选择的作用（马修·库斯特拉（Matthew Kustra），加利福尼亚大学，圣克鲁斯）。最后，今年的几张海报重点介绍了在无脊椎动物系统中推迟合子前生殖屏障的研究，包括蝴蝶（堪萨斯大学的梅丽莎·普拉克），果蝇（谢菲尔德大学的马丁·加洛夫斯基）和甲虫（埃里卡·拉尔森，埃塞俄比亚大学）。丹佛）。

las，经过三天半的前沿科学和激烈的讨论，我们的会议结束了，一群快乐的配子生物学家互相告别，开始了自己的旅程。我们已经期待着下次会议，该会议将于2021年9月6日至10日在Nynäshamn再次举行（https://www.su.se/zoologi/english/research/conferences/welcome-bos）。尽管BoS会议通常很小，只有60至80名代表，但始终欢迎并鼓励新的参加者为精子生物学的研究注入新的思路和热情。因此，现在在日历中记下第16次BoS会议的日期。