Literature DB >> 16136812

Independent inheritance of preference and performance in hybrids between host races of Mitoura butterflies (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae).

Matthew L Forister1.   

Abstract

Divergent natural selection contributes to reproductive isolation among populations adapting to different habitats or resources if hybrids between populations are intermediate in phenotype and suffer an associated, environmentally dependent reduction in fitness. This prediction was tested using two host races of Mitoura butterflies. Thirty-five F1 hybrid and parental lines were created, larvae were raised on the two host plants, and oviposition preferences were assayed in choice arenas. Larvae from both reciprocal hybrid crosses suffered a host-specific reduction in performance: when reared on incense cedar, hybrid survival was approximately 30% less than the survival of pure lines of the cedar-associated host race. The performance of hybrid larvae reared on the other host, MacNab cypress, was not reduced relative to parental genotypes. Females from both reciprocal hybrid crosses preferred to oviposit on incense cedar, the same host that resulted in the reduced survival of hybrid larvae. Thus, dominance is implicated in the inheritance of traits involved in both preference and performance, which do not appear to be genetically linked in Mitoura butterflies. Gene flow between host races may be reduced because the correlation between preference and performance that was previously described in parental populations is essentially broken by hybridization.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16136812

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Evolution        ISSN: 0014-3820            Impact factor:   3.694


  13 in total

1.  Genetic architecture underlying host choice differentiation in the sympatric host races of Lochmaea capreae leaf beetles.

Authors:  Shaghayegh Soudi; Klaus Reinhold; Leif Engqvist
Journal:  Genetica       Date:  2016-02-09       Impact factor: 1.082

2.  Dynamic patterns of adaptive radiation.

Authors:  Sergey Gavrilets; Aaron Vose
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2005-12-05       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Ecologically dependent postmating isolation between sympatric host forms of Neochlamisus bebbianae leaf beetles.

Authors:  Scott P Egan; Daniel J Funk
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2009-10-29       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Complex inheritance of larval adaptation in Plutella xylostella to a novel host plant.

Authors:  K Henniges-Janssen; A Reineke; D G Heckel; A T Groot
Journal:  Heredity (Edinb)       Date:  2011-06-15       Impact factor: 3.821

5.  Field studies reveal strong postmating isolation between ecologically divergent butterfly populations.

Authors:  Carolyn S McBride; Michael C Singer
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2010-10-26       Impact factor: 8.029

6.  Is the cereal rust mite, Abacarus hystrix really a generalist? - Testing colonization performance on novel hosts.

Authors:  Anna Skoracka; Lechosław Kuczyński
Journal:  Exp Appl Acarol       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 2.132

7.  Escaping an evolutionary trap: preference and performance of a native insect on an exotic invasive host.

Authors:  Margaret S Keeler; Frances S Chew
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2008-03-08       Impact factor: 3.225

8.  Can preference for oviposition sites initiate reproductive isolation in Callosobruchus maculatus?

Authors:  Emma Rova; Mats Björklund
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-01-31       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Postzygotic Isolation Evolves before Prezygotic Isolation between Fresh and Saltwater Populations of the Rainwater Killifish, Lucania parva.

Authors:  Genevieve M Kozak; Arthur B Rudolph; Beatrice L Colon; Rebecca C Fuller
Journal:  Int J Evol Biol       Date:  2012-01-30

10.  Are adaptation costs necessary to build up a local adaptation pattern?

Authors:  Sara Magalhães; Elodie Blanchet; Martijn Egas; Isabelle Olivieri
Journal:  BMC Evol Biol       Date:  2009-08-03       Impact factor: 3.260

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.