Literature DB >> 15795864

Experimental removal and elevation of sexual selection: does sexual selection generate manipulative males and resistant females?

Helen S Crudgington1, Andrew P Beckerman, Lena Brüstle, Kathleen Green, Rhonda R Snook.   

Abstract

Sexual conflict over reproduction can occur between males and females. In several naturally promiscuous insect species, experimental evolution studies that have enforced monogamy found evidence for sexual conflict. Here, we subjected the naturally promiscuous, sperm-heteromorphic fruit fly Drosophila pseudoobscura to enforced monogamy, standard levels of promiscuity, and elevated opportunities for promiscuity in four replicate lines. We examined the effect of male and female selection history and the proximate effect of variation in male density on female fitness parameters. We found that male density rather than male selection history explained a greater degree of female fecundity, egg hatching success, and productivity. Additionally, females selected under elevated promiscuity had greater fecundity and hatching success than did enforced monogamy females. Selection line males do not differ in their capacity to coerce females to remate, suggesting no divergence in precopulatory manipulative ability. However, these males did vary in their ability to suppress female remating, suggesting postcopulatory manipulation. These results indicate that sexual conflict can be manifested through both the proximate effects of male density and the historical levels of sexual selection and that the sexes respond differentially to these factors and further stress the multifarious channels of sexual communication that contribute to fitness.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15795864     DOI: 10.1086/429353

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am Nat        ISSN: 0003-0147            Impact factor:   3.926


  26 in total

1.  Adaptations to sexual selection and sexual conflict: insights from experimental evolution and artificial selection.

Authors:  Dominic A Edward; Claudia Fricke; Tracey Chapman
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2010-08-27       Impact factor: 6.237

2.  Sexual selection drives the evolution of male wing interference patterns.

Authors:  M F Hawkes; E Duffy; R Joag; A Skeats; J Radwan; N Wedell; M D Sharma; D J Hosken; J Troscianko
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2019-05-29       Impact factor: 5.349

Review 3.  Detecting sexual conflict and sexually antagonistic coevolution.

Authors:  Locke Rowe; Troy Day
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2006-02-28       Impact factor: 6.237

Review 4.  The evolution of sexually antagonistic phenotypes.

Authors:  Jennifer C Perry; Locke Rowe
Journal:  Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol       Date:  2015-06-01       Impact factor: 10.005

5.  Female, but not male, nematodes evolve under experimental sexual coevolution.

Authors:  K Fritzsche; N Timmermeyer; M Wolter; N K Michiels
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2014-12-07       Impact factor: 5.349

6.  Release from intralocus sexual conflict? Evolved loss of a male sexual trait demasculinizes female gene expression.

Authors:  Jack G Rayner; Sonia Pascoal; Nathan W Bailey
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2019-04-24       Impact factor: 5.349

7.  The Old and the New: Discovery Proteomics Identifies Putative Novel Seminal Fluid Proteins in Drosophila.

Authors:  Timothy L Karr; Helen Southern; Matthew A Rosenow; Toni I Gossmann; Rhonda R Snook
Journal:  Mol Cell Proteomics       Date:  2019-02-13       Impact factor: 5.911

8.  Softness of selection and mating system interact to shape trait evolution under sexual conflict.

Authors:  Xiang-Yi Li Richter; Brian Hollis
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2021-09-05       Impact factor: 4.171

9.  Molecular social interactions: Drosophila melanogaster seminal fluid proteins as a case study.

Authors:  Laura K Sirot; Brooke A LaFlamme; Jessica L Sitnik; C Dustin Rubinstein; Frank W Avila; Clement Y Chow; Mariana F Wolfner
Journal:  Adv Genet       Date:  2010-01-13       Impact factor: 1.944

10.  Female sexual polymorphism and fecundity consequences of male mating harassment in the wild.

Authors:  Thomas P Gosden; Erik I Svensson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2007-06-27       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.