Literature DB >> 19490076

Contribution of multiple isolating barriers to reproductive isolation between a pair of phytophagous ladybird beetles.

Kei W Matsubayashi1, Haruo Katakura.   

Abstract

Reproductive isolation between species may often be attained by multiple isolating barriers, but the components are rarely studied in animal taxa. To elucidate the nature of multiple isolating barriers, we quantified the strength of three premating barriers, including ecologically based ones (seasonal, habitat, and sexual), two postmating-prehatching barriers (reduced egg hatchability and conspecific sperm precedence [CSP]), and one posthatching barrier, including four components of F(1) hybrid reduced fitness, between two phytophagous ladybird beetles, Henosepilachna vigintioctomaculata and H. pustulosa. We detected five positive barriers (habitat isolation, sexual isolation, reduced egg hatchability, CSP, and reduced egg hatchability in backcrosses of F(1) hybrids). None of these barriers entirely prevents gene exchange when it acts alone, but jointly they generate nearly complete reproductive isolation even between sympatric populations. Host fidelity contributed most strongly to reproductive isolation by reducing interspecific hybridization through several important types of ecological isolation, including microspatial, habitat, and seasonal isolation. The existence of multiple isolating barriers likely helps keep reproductive isolation stable and robust, by complementing changes in the strength of leaky barriers. This complementarity of multiple isolating barriers yields the concept of robustness of reproductive isolation, which is important when considering the long-term maintenance of species boundaries in coexisting species pairs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19490076     DOI: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2009.00738.x

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


  9 in total

1.  Geographical variation in postzygotic isolation and its genetic basis within and between two Mimulus species.

Authors:  Noland H Martin; John H Willis
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2010-08-27       Impact factor: 6.237

2.  Cryptic gametic interactions confer both conspecific and heterospecific advantages in the Chrysochus (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) hybrid zone.

Authors:  Merrill A Peterson; Erica L Larson; Margaret Brassil; Kati J Buckingham; Danielle Juárez; Joseph Deas; Donna Mangloña; Michael A White; Jonathan Maslan; Andrew Schweitzer; Kirsten J Monsen
Journal:  Genetica       Date:  2011-03-30       Impact factor: 1.082

3.  Heterospecific pairing and hybridization between Nasutitermes corniger and N. ephratae.

Authors:  Tamara R Hartke; Rebeca B Rosengaus
Journal:  Naturwissenschaften       Date:  2011-07-15

4.  Positive selection at a seminal fluid gene within a QTL for conspecific sperm precedence.

Authors:  Alberto Civetta; Angela Reimer
Journal:  Genetica       Date:  2014-11-23       Impact factor: 1.082

5.  Incomplete premating and postmating reproductive barriers between two parapatric populations of a social spider mite.

Authors:  Yukie Sato; Johannes A J Breeuwer; Martijn Egas; Maurice W Sabelis
Journal:  Exp Appl Acarol       Date:  2015-01-30       Impact factor: 2.132

Review 6.  Genetic Factors Influencing Sperm Competition.

Authors:  Alberto Civetta; José M Ranz
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2019-09-13       Impact factor: 4.599

7.  Reproductive interference hampers species coexistence despite conspecific sperm precedence.

Authors:  Ryosuke Iritani; Suzuki Noriyuki
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2021-02-02       Impact factor: 2.912

8.  Assortative mating between two sympatric closely-related specialists: inferred from molecular phylogenetic analysis and behavioral data.

Authors:  Huai-Jun Xue; Wen-Zhu Li; Xing-Ke Yang
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2014-06-25       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Do candidate genes mediating conspecific sperm precedence affect sperm competitive ability within species? A test case in Drosophila.

Authors:  Alberto Civetta; Scott Finn
Journal:  G3 (Bethesda)       Date:  2014-07-16       Impact factor: 3.154

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.