Literature DB >> 16568635

Standing genetic variance for female resistance to harm from males and its relationship to intralocus sexual conflict.

Timothy A Lew1, Edward H Morrow, William R Rice.   

Abstract

Interlocus sexual conflict theory predicts that some male adaptations are harmful to their mates. Females are therefore expected to evolve resistance to this harm. Using cytogenetic cloning techniques, we tested for heritable genetic variation among females for resistance to harm from males and determined whether propensity to remate, female body size, and intralocus conflict contributes to this variation. We found low but significant heritability for female resistance, but this variation accounted for more than half of the standing genetic variation for net fitness among females. We found no association between female resistance and female body size or level of intralocus sexual conflict. Reluctance to remate was found to be an important factor contributing to the female resistance phenotype, and we found a positive selection gradient on this trait. However, we observed only a nonsignificant positive correlation between a female's resistance and her net fitness. One factor contributing to the observed nominal level of selection on female resistance was that males cause the greatest amount of harm to females with the highest intrinsic fecundity.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16568635

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


  14 in total

1.  Mating with large males decreases the immune defence of females in Drosophila melanogaster.

Authors:  K Imroze; N G Prasad
Journal:  J Genet       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 1.166

2.  Associations between sperm competition and natural variation in male reproductive genes on the third chromosome of Drosophila melanogaster.

Authors:  Anthony C Fiumera; Bethany L Dumont; Andrew G Clark
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2007-04-15       Impact factor: 4.562

3.  Autosomal variation for male body size and sperm competition phenotypes is uncorrelated in Drosophila melanogaster.

Authors:  Rui Zhang; Linda Amah; Anthony C Fiumera
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2008-10-23       Impact factor: 3.703

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.  Characterizing male-female interactions using natural genetic variation in Drosophila melanogaster.

Authors:  Michael Reinhart; Tara Carney; Andrew G Clark; Anthony C Fiumera
Journal:  J Hered       Date:  2014-11-25       Impact factor: 2.645

Review 6.  Polyandry and alternative mating tactics.

Authors:  Bryan D Neff; Erik I Svensson
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2013-01-21       Impact factor: 6.237

7.  Remating in Drosophila melanogaster: are indirect benefits condition dependent?

Authors:  Tristan A F Long; Alison Pischedda; William R Rice
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 3.694

Review 8.  Pathology from evolutionary conflict, with a theory of X chromosome versus autosome conflict over sexually antagonistic traits.

Authors:  Steven A Frank; Bernard J Crespi
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-06-20       Impact factor: 11.205

9.  Evolution of reproductive isolation as a by-product of divergent life-history evolution in laboratory populations of Drosophila melanogaster.

Authors:  Shampa M Ghosh; Amitabh Joshi
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2012-11-19       Impact factor: 2.912

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.