| Literature DB >> 22215086 |
Tapio Mappes1, Jouni Aspi, Esa Koskela, Suzanne C Mills, Tanja Poikonen, Juha Tuomi.
Abstract
Killing conspecific infants (infanticide) is among the most puzzling phenomena in nature. Stable polymorphism in such behaviour could be maintained by negative frequency-dependent selection (benefit of rare types). However, it is currently unknown whether there is genetic polymorphism in infanticidal behaviour or whether infanticide may have any fitness advantages when rare. Here we show genetic polymorphism in non-parental infanticide. Our novel invasion experiment confirms negative frequency-dependent selection in wild bank vole populations, where resource benefits allow an infanticidal strategy to invade a population of non-infanticidal individuals. The results show that infanticidal behaviour is highly heritable with genetic correlation across the sexes. Thus, a positive correlative response in male behaviour is expected when selection operates on females only and vice versa. Our results, on one hand, demonstrate potential benefits of infanticide, and on the other, they open a new perspective of correlative evolution of infanticide in females and males.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22215086 PMCID: PMC3272565 DOI: 10.1038/ncomms1613
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nat Commun ISSN: 2041-1723 Impact factor: 14.919
Figure 1The design of the invasion experiment.
Negative frequency-dependent selection promotes polymorphism when rare mutants successfully invade monomorphic resident populations. In the factorial design of our invasion experiments, both infanticidal (INF) and non-infanticidal (NON-INF) individuals represented either resident or invader strategies, and the set up was replicated in enclosures with or without supplemental food supplies.
Incidences of infanticidal behaviour among female and male offpring by male and female propositi in a laboratory population.
| Mother | Female | 0.719 | 0.56 | 0.02 |
| Male | 0.592 | 0.36 | 0.01 | |
| Father | Male | 0.669 | 0.86 | 0.02 |
| | Female | 0.715 | 0.51 | 0.03 |
t represents the parent–offspring regression for infanticide (see details in Methods). 2t within sexes (mother–female offspring; father–male offspring) represents heritabilities of liability to infanticidal behaviour.
General linear model analysis of change in infanticidal frequency.
| Initial frequency | 0.429 (±0.09) | 16 | 87.27 | <0.001 |
| Food | −0.073 (±0.09) | 16 | 3.02 | 0.101 |
| Initial frequency× food | 0.376 (±0.13) | 16 | 8.11 | 0.012 |
| Initial frequency | 0.410 (±0.11) | 15 | 53.60 | <0.001 |
| Food | −0.040 (±0.11) | 15 | 4.52 | 0.051 |
| Initial frequency×food | 0.448 (±0.17) | 15 | 6.68 | 0.021 |
| Initial frequency | 0.492 (±0.08) | 16 | 120.64 | <0.001 |
| Food | −0.086 (±0.08) | 16 | 1.66 | 0.216 |
| Initial frequency×food | 0.326 (±0.12) | 16 | 7.49 | 0.015 |
In the models, the change in frequency was explained by the initial frequency of infanticidal behaviour (rare or common) and food manipulation (supplemental food or no extra food) and their interaction.
Figure 2Frequencies and numbers of infanticidal bank voles during the invasion experiment.
(a) Frequency of infanticidal individuals in populations at the end of the breeding season. Closed circles show the mean number of voles in populations where infanticidal individuals were initially rare (and non-infanticidal individuals common); and open circles indicate the populations where infanticidal individuals were initially common (and non-infanticidal individuals rare) in founder populations. Dashed lines show the initial frequency of infanticidal tactics in each treatment. (b) Frequency change in infanticidal tactics with different food manipulations (for statistics see Table 2). Asterisks indicate a significant difference (** P<0.01, * P<0.05) from the zero line. Infanticidal individuals can invade both food treatments when they are initially rare (closed circles; t=11.14, df=3, P=0.002; t=5.41, df=4, P=0.006; respectively), but more easily invade populations when food is limited (comparison between the food treatments: t=3.86, df=7, P=0.006). Instead, the rare non-infanticidal tactic (open circles) was significantly favoured only in the populations with supplemented food (t=5.41, df=4, P=0.012). (c) Population size increased with supplemental food (F=28.35, P<0.001), but was not affected by the initial frequency of infanticidal individuals in the population (F=0.018, P=0.895). NS, not significant.
General linear mixed model analysis of the infanticidal status of individuals after the field experiment.
| Initial frequency | 79.2 | 3.47 | 0.066 |
| Food | 79.2 | 5.84 | 0.018 |
| Sex | 8.11 | 15.96 | <0.001 |
| Initial frequency×food | 79.2 | 6.64 | 0.012 |
| Initial frequency×sex | 573 | 1.04 | 0.309 |
| Food×sex | 573 | 0.17 | 0.679 |
| Initial frequency×food×sex | 573 | 0.45 | 0.504 |
In the model, infanticidal status was explained by the initial frequency of infanticidal behaviour (rare or common) and food manipulation (supplemental food or no extra food) in the population, sex of individual and their interactions. Population (enclosure) is included in the model as a random factor. df=denominator df, numerator df=1 for all factors.
Logit main factor models of parental phenotypes influencing offspring infanticidal behaviour in the laboratory.
| [Mother] | 7.471 | 2 | 0.024 | 3.471 |
| [Father] | 4.808 | 2 | 0.090 | 0.808 |
| [Mother][Father] | 0.001 | 1 | 0.986 | −2.000 |
| [Mother] | 8.584 | 2 | 0.002 | 4.584 |
| [Father] | 2.375 | 2 | 0.305 | −1.625 |
| [Mother][Father] | 2.208 | 1 | 0.137 | 0.208 |
The results of the logit analysis suggest that among female offspring, the parental phenotypes had a significant effect on infanticidal behaviour. The model including both mother and father phenotype as a main effect fitted infanticidal behaviour data adequately (no significant deviation, P=0.986), and it also had the largest information content (that is, smallest AIC–q). On the contrary, among male offspring only the phenotype of the father seemed to be important. The model including only the phenotype of the father as a main effect was the simplest model that fitted the male response data adequately (P=0.305), and it also had the smallest AIC–q (−1.625). Including the phenotype of the mother as a main effect into this model actually reduced the explanatory power of the model.