Literature DB >> 12427314

Positive genetic correlation between female preference and offspring fitness.

Emma Hine1, Shelly Lachish, Megan Higgie, Mark W Blows.   

Abstract

In many species, females display preferences for extreme male signal traits, but it has not been determined if such preferences evolve as a consequence of females gaining genetic benefits from exercising choice. If females prefer extreme male traits because they indicate male genetic quality that will enhance the fitness of offspring, a genetic correlation will evolve between female preference genes and genes that confer offspring fitness. We show that females of Drosophila serrata prefer extreme male cuticular hydrocarbon (CHC) blends, and that this preference affects offspring fitness. Female preference is positively genetically correlated with offspring fitness, indicating that females have gained genetic benefits from their choice of males. Despite male CHCs experiencing strong sexual selection, the genes underlying attractive CHCs also conferred lower offspring fitness, suggesting a balance between sexual selection and natural selection may have been reached in this population.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12427314      PMCID: PMC1691147          DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2002.2149

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Biol Sci        ISSN: 0962-8452            Impact factor:   5.349


  8 in total

1.  Interaction between natural and sexual selection during the evolution of mate recognition.

Authors:  Mark W Blows
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2002-06-07       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  The sexual selection continuum.

Authors:  Hanna Kokko; Robert Brooks; John M McNamara; Alasdair I Houston
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2002-07-07       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  Models of speciation by sexual selection on polygenic traits.

Authors:  R Lande
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1981-06       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Mate selection-a selection for a handicap.

Authors:  A Zahavi
Journal:  J Theor Biol       Date:  1975-09       Impact factor: 2.691

5.  The strength of indirect selection on female mating preferences.

Authors:  M Kirkpatrick; N H Barton
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1997-02-18       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Negative genetic correlation between male sexual attractiveness and survival.

Authors:  R Brooks
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2000-07-06       Impact factor: 49.962

7.  Natural selection and the reinforcement of mate recognition.

Authors:  M Higgie; S Chenoweth; M W Blows
Journal:  Science       Date:  2000-10-20       Impact factor: 47.728

8.  Male ornament size as a reliable cue to enhanced offspring viability in the barn swallow.

Authors:  A P Møller
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1994-07-19       Impact factor: 11.205

  8 in total
  21 in total

Review 1.  The evolution of mate choice and mating biases.

Authors:  Hanna Kokko; Robert Brooks; Michael D Jennions; Josephine Morley
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2003-03-22       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  Genetic variance in female condition predicts indirect genetic variance in male sexual display traits.

Authors:  Donna Petfield; Stephen F Chenoweth; Howard D Rundle; Mark W Blows
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2005-04-19       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 3.  Colloquium papers: Numbering the hairs on our heads: the shared challenge and promise of phenomics.

Authors:  David Houle
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2009-10-26       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Physical and Linkage Maps for Drosophila serrata, a Model Species for Studies of Clinal Adaptation and Sexual Selection.

Authors:  Ann J Stocker; Bosco B Rusuwa; Mark J Blacket; Francesca D Frentiu; Mitchell Sullivan; Bradley R Foley; Scott Beatson; Ary A Hoffmann; Stephen F Chenoweth
Journal:  G3 (Bethesda)       Date:  2012-02-01       Impact factor: 3.154

5.  Artificial selection reveals sex differences in the genetic basis of sexual attractiveness.

Authors:  Thomas P Gosden; Adam J Reddiex; Stephen F Chenoweth
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-05-07       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Natural selection stops the evolution of male attractiveness.

Authors:  Emma Hine; Katrina McGuigan; Mark W Blows
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-02-14       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  Divergent selection and the evolution of signal traits and mating preferences.

Authors:  Howard D Rundle; Stephen F Chenoweth; Paul Doughty; Mark W Blows
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2005-10-25       Impact factor: 8.029

8.  The indirect benefits of mating with attractive males outweigh the direct costs.

Authors:  Megan L Head; John Hunt; Michael D Jennions; Robert Brooks
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2005-01-25       Impact factor: 8.029

9.  An experimental test for indirect benefits in Drosophila melanogaster.

Authors:  Howard D Rundle; Anders Odeen; Arne Ø Mooers
Journal:  BMC Evol Biol       Date:  2007-03-09       Impact factor: 3.260

10.  Direct selection on male attractiveness and female preference fails to produce a response.

Authors:  Matthew Hall; Anna K Lindholm; Robert Brooks
Journal:  BMC Evol Biol       Date:  2004-01-14       Impact factor: 3.260

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.