Literature DB >> 16612888

Assessing sexual conflict in the Drosophila melanogaster laboratory model system.

William R Rice1, Andrew D Stewart, Edward H Morrow, Jodell E Linder, Nicole Orteiza, Phillip G Byrne.   

Abstract

We describe a graphical model of interlocus coevolution used to distinguish between the interlocus sexual conflict that leads to sexually antagonistic coevolution, and the intrinsic conflict over mating rate that is an integral part of traditional models of sexual selection. We next distinguish the 'laboratory island' approach from the study of both inbred lines and laboratory populations that are newly derived from nature, discuss why we consider it to be one of the most fitting forms of laboratory analysis to study interlocus sexual conflict, and then describe four experiments using this approach with Drosophila melanogaster. The first experiment evaluates the efficacy of the laboratory model system to study interlocus sexual conflict by comparing remating rates of females when they are, or are not, provided with a spatial refuge from persistent male courtship. The second experiment tests for a lag-load in males that is due to adaptations that have accumulated in females, which diminish male-induced harm while simultaneously interfering with a male's ability to compete in the context of sexual selection. The third and fourth experiments test for a lag-load in females owing to direct costs from their interactions with males, and for the capacity for indirect benefits to compensate for these direct costs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16612888      PMCID: PMC1569610          DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2005.1787

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci        ISSN: 0962-8436            Impact factor:   6.237


  30 in total

1.  Sexual selection fails to promote adaptation to a new environment.

Authors:  Brett Holland
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 3.694

2.  Sexual recombination and the power of natural selection.

Authors:  W R Rice; A K Chippindale
Journal:  Science       Date:  2001-10-19       Impact factor: 47.728

3.  Bayesian sperm competition estimates.

Authors:  Beatrix Jones; Andrew G Clark
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 4.562

Review 4.  Female choice of sexually antagonistic male adaptations: a critical review of some current research.

Authors:  C Cordero; W G Eberhard
Journal:  J Evol Biol       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 2.411

5.  No evidence that polyandry benefits females in Drosophila melanogaster.

Authors:  William D Brown; Adam Bjork; Karin Schneider; Scott Pitnick
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 3.694

6.  The X chromosome is a hot spot for sexually antagonistic fitness variation.

Authors:  Jonathan R Gibson; Adam K Chippindale; William R Rice
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2002-03-07       Impact factor: 5.349

7.  Owen's model of a genetical system with differential viability between sexes.

Authors:  S P Mandel
Journal:  Heredity (Edinb)       Date:  1971-02       Impact factor: 3.821

8.  Remating in Drosophila melanogaster: an examination of the trading-up and intrinsic male-quality hypotheses.

Authors:  P G Byrne; W R Rice
Journal:  J Evol Biol       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 2.411

9.  Effect of a refuge from persistent male courtship in the Drosophila laboratory environment.

Authors:  Phillip G Byrne; Gavin R Rice; William R Rice
Journal:  Integr Comp Biol       Date:  2008-02-11       Impact factor: 3.326

10.  Sex differences in fitness and selection for centric fusions between sex-chromosomes and autosomes.

Authors:  D Charlesworth; B Charlesworth
Journal:  Genet Res       Date:  1980-04       Impact factor: 1.588

View more
  31 in total

1.  Myoinhibiting peptides are the ancestral ligands of the promiscuous Drosophila sex peptide receptor.

Authors:  Jeroen Poels; Tom Van Loy; Hans Peter Vandersmissen; Boris Van Hiel; Sofie Van Soest; Ronald J Nachman; Jozef Vanden Broeck
Journal:  Cell Mol Life Sci       Date:  2010-05-11       Impact factor: 9.261

2.  Drosophila melanogaster females change mating behaviour and offspring production based on social context.

Authors:  Jean-Christophe Billeter; Samyukta Jagadeesh; Nancy Stepek; Reza Azanchi; Joel D Levine
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2012-02-01       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  Are flies kind to kin? The role of intra- and inter-sexual relatedness in mediating reproductive conflict.

Authors:  Emily S Martin; Tristan A F Long
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2015-12-22       Impact factor: 5.349

Review 4.  Introduction. Sexual conflict: a new paradigm?

Authors:  T Tregenza; N Wedell; T Chapman
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2006-02-28       Impact factor: 6.237

5.  Perception of male-male competition influences Drosophila copulation behaviour even in species where females rarely remate.

Authors:  Anne Lizé; Rowan J Doff; Eve A Smaller; Zenobia Lewis; Gregory D D Hurst
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2011-07-13       Impact factor: 3.703

6.  Cross-generational fitness benefits of mating and male seminal fluid.

Authors:  Nicholas K Priest; Deborah A Roach; Laura F Galloway
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2008-02-23       Impact factor: 3.703

7.  Adult locomotory activity mediates intralocus sexual conflict in a laboratory-adapted population of Drosophila melanogaster.

Authors:  Tristan A F Long; William R Rice
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2007-12-22       Impact factor: 5.349

Review 8.  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

9.  A cost of sexual attractiveness to high-fitness females.

Authors:  Tristan A F Long; Alison Pischedda; Andrew D Stewart; William R Rice
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2009-12-08       Impact factor: 8.029

10.  Coevolution of interacting fertilization proteins.

Authors:  Nathaniel L Clark; Joe Gasper; Masashi Sekino; Stevan A Springer; Charles F Aquadro; Willie J Swanson
Journal:  PLoS Genet       Date:  2009-07-24       Impact factor: 5.917

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.