| Literature DB >> 19594896 |
Melissa L Thomas1, Leigh W Simmons.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Females in a wide range of taxa have been shown to base their choice of mates on pheromone signals. However, little research has focussed specifically on the form and intensity of selection that mate choice imposes on the pheromone signal. Using multivariate selection analysis, we characterise directly the form and intensity of sexual selection acting on cuticular hydrocarbons, chemical compounds widely used in the selection of mates in insects. Using the Australian field cricket Teleogryllus oceanicus as a model organism, we use three measures of male attractiveness to estimate fitness; mating success, the duration of courtship required to elicit copulation, and subsequent spermatophore attachment duration.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2009 PMID: 19594896 PMCID: PMC2728729 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2148-9-162
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Evol Biol ISSN: 1471-2148 Impact factor: 3.260
The principal component analysis of trait loading shows the correlations between the relative concentrations of cuticular hydrocarbon peaks and the six components extracted from the principal component analysis.
| Principle component | |||||||
| Peak | Hydrocarbon | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
| 1 | unresolved | 0.230 | 0.351 | -0.347 | 0.214 | -0.366 | -0.318 |
| 2 | unresolved | 0.495 | -0.045 | -0.192 | -0.339 | -0.002 | -0.303 |
| 4 | unresolved | 0.156 | -0.162 | -0.184 | 0.276 | -0.294 | |
| 5 | C31:1 | -0.203 | -0.030 | -0.215 | 0.011 | 0.346 | |
| 6 | C31:1 | -0.048 | 0.438 | 0.179 | 0.217 | 0.128 | |
| 7 | C31:1 | 0.327 | 0.036 | -0.066 | 0.001 | ||
| 8 | C31:2 | 0.105 | 0.212 | 0.281 | 0.006 | 0.100 | |
| 9 | C31:2 | 0.586 | -0.177 | -0.103 | 0.123 | 0.074 | |
| 10 | C31:2 | 0.532 | -0.102 | -0.199 | 0.172 | 0.029 | |
| 11 | C31:2 | -0.234 | -0.144 | 0.090 | 0.091 | -0.083 | |
| 12 | C33 | 0.402 | 0.071 | -0.083 | 0.441 | -0.137 | |
| 13 | unresolved | 0.458 | -0.538 | 0.468 | -0.097 | 0.076 | -0.187 |
| 14 | C33:1 | 0.400 | 0.070 | -0.419 | 0.445 | -0.134 | 0.112 |
| 15 | C33:1 | 0.284 | -0.150 | -0.314 | -0.008 | -0.034 | |
| 16 | C33:1 | -0.435 | -0.149 | -0.044 | 0.186 | -0.125 | |
| 17 | C33:1 | 0.165 | -0.146 | 0.453 | -0.026 | 0.075 | |
| 18 | C33:2 | -0.190 | -0.190 | -0.267 | -0.312 | 0.171 | |
| 19 | C33:2 | -0.411 | 0.046 | -0.126 | -0.279 | 0.190 | |
| 20 | C33:2 | -0.229 | 0.236 | -0.113 | -0.070 | 0.072 | |
| 21 | C33:2 | -0.118 | 0.248 | 0.199 | 0.204 | 0.051 | |
| 22 | C35:2 | 0.326 | -0.224 | -0.034 | 0.297 | 0.138 | 0.355 |
Peaks that contribute significant amounts to the principal components are in bold.
The vector of standardized linear selection gradients (β), and the matrix (γ) of standardized quadratic and correlational selection gradients for the six principal components with eigenvalues greater than one.
| Relative mating success | |||||||
| β | PC1 | PC2 | PC3 | PC4 | PC5 | PC6 | |
| PC1 | 0.004 | -0.001 | 0.001 | **0.027 | 0.002 | -0.006 | 0.006 |
| PC2 | **0.018 | . | 0.009 | *-0.022 | 0.012 | -0.019 | -0.009 |
| PC3 | 0.048 | . | . | 0.002 | 0.009 | *-0.037 | *-0.049 |
| PC4 | -0.013 | . | . | . | 0.012 | -0.003 | 0.033 |
| PC5 | -0.020 | . | . | . | . | -0.022 | 0.009 |
| PC6 | -0.025 | . | . | . | . | . | **-0.054 |
* P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001
The response variable is relative mating success. Linear and nonlinear selection gradients were estimated in separate regressions.
The vector of standardized linear selection gradients (β), and the matrix (γ) of standardized quadratic and correlational selection gradients for the six principal components with eigenvalues greater than one.
| Inverse relative courtship duration | |||||||
| β | PC1 | PC2 | PC3 | PC4 | PC5 | PC6 | |
| PC1 | 0.011 | -0.006 | 0.001 | 0.009 | 0.001 | 0.008 | -0.011 |
| PC2 | 0.019 | . | -0.002 | -0.006 | 0.012 | 0.003 | -0.009 |
| PC3 | 0.018 | . | . | -0.010 | -0.012 | -0.015 | -0.043 |
| PC4 | -0.018 | . | . | . | 0.003 | 0.021 | 0.011 |
| PC5 | -0.047 | . | . | . | . | 0.008 | 0.035 |
| PC6 | -0.038 | . | . | . | . | . | -0.027 |
No significant values
The response variable is inverse relative courtship duration. Linear and nonlinear selection gradients were estimated in separate regressions.
The vector of standardized linear selection gradients (β), and the matrix (γ) of standardized quadratic and correlational selection gradients for the six principal components with eigenvalues greater than one.
| Relative spermatophore attachment duration | |||||||
| β | PC1 | PC2 | PC3 | PC4 | PC5 | PC6 | |
| PC1 | 0.005 | 0.008 | -0.001 | 0.016 | *0.019 | -0.009 | 0.018 |
| PC2 | <0.001 | . | 0.013 | -0.011 | -0.004 | -0.012 | -0.026 |
| PC3 | -0.016 | . | . | 0.009 | -0.004 | -0.037 | -0.064 |
| PC4 | -0.067 | . | . | . | -0.011 | 0.005 | -0.021 |
| PC5 | -0.025 | . | . | . | . | -0.023 | -0.007 |
| PC6 | -0.034 | . | . | . | . | . | -0.049 |
* P < 0.05
The response variable is relative spermataphore attachment duration. Linear and nonlinear selection gradients were estimated in separate regressions.
M matrix of eigenvectors from the canonical analysis of γ for the 6 principal components. θ is the multivariate linear selection.
| Relative mating success | ||||||||
| θ | λi | PC1 | PC2 | PC3 | PC4 | PC5 | PC6 | |
| *0.029 | ***0.027 | 0.383 | -0.288 | 0.784 | -0.110 | -0.286 | -0.249 | |
| 0.017 | ***0.019 | 0.189 | 0.500 | 0.151 | 0.796 | -0.223 | 0.092 | |
| **-0.038 | *0.009 | -0.027 | -0.766 | -0.025 | 0.540 | 0.264 | 0.224 | |
| -0.012 | *-0.006 | 0.895 | 0.025 | -0.300 | -0.127 | 0.236 | 0.189 | |
| 0.012 | ***-0.033 | -0.052 | 0.252 | 0.358 | 0.057 | 0.859 | -0.255 | |
| -0.009 | ***-0.069 | -0.111 | 0.128 | 0.379 | -0.208 | 0.074 | 0.882 | |
Note: The eigenvalue (λi) of each eigenvector (m) is given in the third column.
* P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001
The response variable is relative mating success.
M matrix of eigenvectors from the canonical analysis of γ for the 6 principal components and weight.
| Inverse relative courtship duration | ||||||||
| θ | λi | PC1 | PC2 | PC3 | PC4 | PC5 | PC6 | |
| *-0.061 | **0.030 | -0.028 | 0.107 | -0.415 | 0.458 | 0.669 | 0.398 | |
| 0.029 | 0.004 | 0.271 | 0.715 | 0.233 | 0.505 | -0.124 | -0.302 | |
| -0.005 | <-0.001 | 0.705 | -0.259 | 0.394 | -0.148 | 0.493 | -0.127 | |
| 0.008 | -0.008 | 0.033 | 0.624 | -0.191 | -0.717 | 0.235 | 0.065 | |
| -0.009 | **-0.014 | -0.649 | 0.062 | 0.598 | -0.007 | 0.437 | -0.165 | |
| -0.009 | ***-0.045 | 0.088 | 0.131 | 0.473 | -0.004 | -0.219 | 0.839 | |
θ is the multivariate linear selection.
Note: The eigenvalue (λi) of each eigenvector (m) is given in the third column.
** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001
The response variable is relative courtship duration.
M matrix of eigenvectors from the canonical analysis of γ for the 6 principal components and weight.
| Relative spermatophore attachment duration | ||||||||
| θ | λi | PC1 | PC2 | PC3 | PC4 | PC5 | PC6 | |
| <0.001 | **0.030 | 0.281 | 0.061 | 0.845 | 0.084 | -0.307 | -0.318 | |
| 0.005 | **0.017 | -0.359 | 0.903 | -0.032 | -0.117 | -0.069 | -0.192 | |
| -0.006 | *0.010 | 0.813 | 0.382 | -0.280 | 0.309 | -0.009 | 0.138 | |
| **-0.019 | -0.009 | -0.255 | -0.029 | 0.006 | 0.857 | 0.327 | -0.304 | |
| 0.002 | *-0.029 | 0.212 | 0.066 | 0.192 | -0.343 | 0.865 | -0.218 | |
| -0.018 | ***-0.072 | -0.147 | 0.174 | 0.411 | 0.175 | 0.213 | 0.838 | |
θ is the multivariate linear selection.
Note: The eigenvalue (λi) of each eigenvector (m) is given in the third column.
* P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001
The response variable is relative spermatophore attachment duration.
Figure 1The fitness surface of the major canonical axes . The two axes represent the eigenvectors with the strongest positive (m1) and negative (m6) eigenvalues. The surface is shaded in colours where red corresponds to the greatest and green the lowest values on the z axis.
Figure 2The fitness surface of the two major canonical axes . The two axes represent the eigenvectors with both the strongest nonlinear selection (highest eigenvalues) and the strongest positive (m1) and negative (m6) eigenvalues. The surface is shaded in colours where red corresponds to the greatest and green the lowest values on the z axis.
Figure 3The fitness surface of the two major canonical axes . The two axes represent the eigenvectors with both the strongest nonlinear selection (highest eigenvalues) and the strongest positive (m1) and negative (m6) eigenvalues. The surface is shaded in colours where red corresponds to the greatest and green the lowest values on the z axis.