Literature DB >> 18513357

Competitive speciation and costs of choosiness.

M Kopp1, J Hermisson.   

Abstract

We investigate how costs of choosiness affect the evolution of assortative mating in a simple model of competitive speciation. The model allows for a comprehensive analysis by analytical and numerical techniques. We obtain results for two types of costs: mating costs, which restrict the number of males a choosy female can evaluate, and viability costs, which decrease a choosy female's survival. Mating costs significantly reduce the range of parameters for which speciation is possible, but only if the number of males a female can evaluate is small (less than 10). This type of costs can be eliminated if females are allowed to mate randomly at the end of the mating period. Although, in this case, it is not possible to achieve complete reproductive isolation, our results show partial isolation with strong phenotypic clustering. Viability costs counteract selection for assortative mating. As this selection is typically weak, speciation is possible only if viability costs, too, are weak. The above restrictions are less severe if extreme phenotypes have an intrinsically higher carrying capacity.

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18513357     DOI: 10.1111/j.1420-9101.2008.01547.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Evol Biol        ISSN: 1010-061X            Impact factor:   2.411


  16 in total

1.  Evolutionary branching of a magic trait.

Authors:  Eva Kisdi; Tadeas Priklopil
Journal:  J Math Biol       Date:  2010-11-13       Impact factor: 2.259

2.  Pairing dynamics and the origin of species.

Authors:  Oscar Puebla; Eldredge Bermingham; Frédéric Guichard
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2011-09-21       Impact factor: 5.349

Review 3.  Choosiness, a neglected aspect of preference functions: a review of methods, challenges and statistical approaches.

Authors:  Klaus Reinhold; Holger Schielzeth
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2014-11-15       Impact factor: 1.836

4.  The counterintuitive role of sexual selection in species maintenance and speciation.

Authors:  Maria R Servedio; Reinhard Bürger
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2014-05-12       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  A stochastic model for speciation by mating preferences.

Authors:  Camille Coron; Manon Costa; Hélène Leman; Charline Smadi
Journal:  J Math Biol       Date:  2017-09-15       Impact factor: 2.259

Review 6.  Searching for Sympatric Speciation in the Genomic Era.

Authors:  Emilie J Richards; Maria R Servedio; Christopher H Martin
Journal:  Bioessays       Date:  2019-07       Impact factor: 4.345

7.  Mutation size optimizes speciation in an evolutionary model.

Authors:  Nathan D Dees; Sonya Bahar
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-08-03       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Adaptive speciation theory: a conceptual review.

Authors:  Franz J Weissing; Pim Edelaar; G Sander van Doorn
Journal:  Behav Ecol Sociobiol       Date:  2011-01-05       Impact factor: 2.980

9.  Evolution of assortative mating in a population expressing dominance.

Authors:  Kristan A Schneider; Stephan Peischl
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-04-01       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Trade-offs drive resource specialization and the gradual establishment of ecotypes.

Authors:  Bjørn Østman; Randall Lin; Christoph Adami
Journal:  BMC Evol Biol       Date:  2014-05-29       Impact factor: 3.260

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.