Literature DB >> 18660541

Frequency-dependent selection and the evolution of assortative mating.

Sarah P Otto1, Maria R Servedio, Scott L Nuismer.   

Abstract

A long-standing goal in evolutionary biology is to identify the conditions that promote the evolution of reproductive isolation and speciation. The factors promoting sympatric speciation have been of particular interest, both because it is notoriously difficult to prove empirically and because theoretical models have generated conflicting results, depending on the assumptions made. Here, we analyze the conditions under which selection favors the evolution of assortative mating, thereby reducing gene flow between sympatric groups, using a general model of selection, which allows fitness to be frequency dependent. Our analytical results are based on a two-locus diploid model, with one locus altering the trait under selection and the other locus controlling the strength of assortment (a "one-allele" model). Examining both equilibrium and nonequilibrium scenarios, we demonstrate that whenever heterozygotes are less fit, on average, than homozygotes at the trait locus, indirect selection for assortative mating is generated. While costs of assortative mating hinder the evolution of reproductive isolation, they do not prevent it unless they are sufficiently great. Assortative mating that arises because individuals mate within groups (formed in time or space) is most conducive to the evolution of complete assortative mating from random mating. Assortative mating based on female preferences is more restrictive, because the resulting sexual selection can lead to loss of the trait polymorphism and cause the relative fitness of heterozygotes to rise above homozygotes, eliminating the force favoring assortment. When assortative mating is already prevalent, however, sexual selection can itself cause low heterozygous fitness, promoting the evolution of complete reproductive isolation (akin to "reinforcement") regardless of the form of natural selection.

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18660541      PMCID: PMC2516082          DOI: 10.1534/genetics.107.084418

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Genetics        ISSN: 0016-6731            Impact factor:   4.562


  32 in total

1.  Interactions among quantitative traits in the course of sympatric speciation.

Authors:  A S Kondrashov; F A Kondrashov
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1999-07-22       Impact factor: 49.962

Review 2.  Self-referent phenotype matching: theoretical considerations and empirical evidence.

Authors:  M E Hauber; P W Sherman
Journal:  Trends Neurosci       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 13.837

3.  Patterns of parapatric speciation.

Authors:  S Gavrilets; H Li; M D Vose
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 3.694

Review 4.  General models of multilocus evolution.

Authors:  Mark Kirkpatrick; Toby Johnson; Nick Barton
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 4.562

5.  Sexual selection can constrain sympatric speciation.

Authors:  Mark Kirkpatrick; Scott L Nuismer
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2004-04-07       Impact factor: 5.349

6.  Natural and sexual selection on many loci.

Authors:  N H Barton; M Turelli
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  1991-01       Impact factor: 4.562

7.  Evolution in closely adjacent plant populations X: long-term persistence of prereproductive isolation at a mine boundary.

Authors:  J Antonovics
Journal:  Heredity (Edinb)       Date:  2006-04-26       Impact factor: 3.821

8.  Female mate-choice behavior and sympatric speciation.

Authors:  Machteld N Verzijden; Robert F Lachlan; Maria R Servedio
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 3.694

9.  An analytically tractable model for competitive speciation.

Authors:  Pleuni S Pennings; Michael Kopp; Géza Meszéna; Ulf Dieckmann; Joachim Hermisson
Journal:  Am Nat       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 3.926

10.  The evolution of multilocus systems under weak selection.

Authors:  T Nagylaki
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  1993-06       Impact factor: 4.562

View more
  32 in total

1.  Accelerated speciation in colour-polymorphic birds.

Authors:  Andrew F Hugall; Devi Stuart-Fox
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2012-05-09       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  Limits to the evolution of assortative mating by female choice under restricted gene flow.

Authors:  Maria R Servedio
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2010-08-04       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  Evolutionary branching of a magic trait.

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

4.  Evolution of mate choice and the so-called magic traits in ecological speciation.

Authors:  Xavier Thibert-Plante; Sergey Gavrilets
Journal:  Ecol Lett       Date:  2013-06-19       Impact factor: 9.492

5.  Sexual imprinting on ecologically divergent traits leads to sexual isolation in sticklebacks.

Authors:  Genevieve M Kozak; Megan L Head; Janette W Boughman
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2011-01-26       Impact factor: 5.349

6.  Macroevolutionary consequences of "spatial sorting".

Authors:  Michael S Y Lee
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-06-28       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  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 8.  Local variation and parallel evolution: morphological and genetic diversity across a species complex of neotropical crater lake cichlid fishes.

Authors:  Kathryn R Elmer; Henrik Kusche; Topi K Lehtonen; Axel Meyer
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2010-06-12       Impact factor: 6.237

9.  Genetic evidence for hybrid trait speciation in heliconius butterflies.

Authors:  Camilo Salazar; Simon W Baxter; Carolina Pardo-Diaz; Grace Wu; Alison Surridge; Mauricio Linares; Eldredge Bermingham; Chris D Jiggins
Journal:  PLoS Genet       Date:  2010-04-29       Impact factor: 5.917

10.  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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.