Literature DB >> 23034705

Constraints on the coevolution of contemporary human males and females.

Stephen C Stearns1, Diddahally R Govindaraju, Douglas Ewbank, Sean G Byars.   

Abstract

Because autosomal genes in sexually reproducing organisms spend on average half their time in each sex, and because the traits that they influence encounter different selection pressures in males and females, the evolutionary responses of one sex are constrained by processes occurring in the other sex. Although intralocus sexual conflict can restrict sexes from reaching their phenotypic optima, no direct evidence currently supports its operation in humans. Here, we show that the pattern of multivariate selection acting on human height, weight, blood pressure and glucose, total cholesterol, and age at first birth differs significantly between males and females, and that the angles between male and female linear (77.8 ± 20.5°) and nonlinear (99.1 ± 25.9°) selection gradients were closer to orthogonal than zero, confirming the presence of sexually antagonistic selection. We also found evidence for intralocus sexual conflict demonstrated by significant changes in the predicted male and female responses to selection of individual traits when cross-sex genetic covariances were included and a significant reduction in the angle between male- and female-predicted responses when cross-sex covariances were included (16.9 ± 15.7°), compared with when they were excluded (87.9 ± 31.6°). We conclude that intralocus sexual conflict constrains the joint evolutionary responses of the two sexes in a contemporary human population.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23034705      PMCID: PMC3497102          DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2012.2024

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Biol Sci        ISSN: 0962-8452            Impact factor:   5.349


  31 in total

1.  Sexually antagonistic cytonuclear fitness interactions in Drosophila melanogaster.

Authors:  D M Rand; A G Clark; L M Kann
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 4.562

2.  Elimination of a genetic correlation between the sexes via artificial correlational selection.

Authors:  Lynda F Delph; Janet C Steven; Ingrid A Anderson; Christopher R Herlihy; Edmund D Brodie
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2011-06-13       Impact factor: 3.694

3.  Contrasting mutual sexual selection on homologous signal traits in Drosophila serrata.

Authors:  Stephen F Chenoweth; Mark W Blows
Journal:  Am Nat       Date:  2004-12-28       Impact factor: 3.926

Review 4.  Intralocus sexual conflict.

Authors:  Russell Bonduriansky; Stephen F Chenoweth
Journal:  Trends Ecol Evol       Date:  2009-03-21       Impact factor: 17.712

Review 5.  Intralocus sexual conflict.

Authors:  G Sander van Doorn
Journal:  Ann N Y Acad Sci       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 5.691

6.  Do high-status people really have fewer children? : Education, income, and fertility in the contemporary U.S.

Authors:  Jason Weeden; Michael J Abrams; Melanie C Green; John Sabini
Journal:  Hum Nat       Date:  2006-12

Review 7.  Measuring selection in contemporary human populations.

Authors:  Stephen C Stearns; Sean G Byars; Diddahally R Govindaraju; Douglas Ewbank
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2010-08-03       Impact factor: 53.242

8.  Human sexual dimorphism in size may be triggered by environmental cues.

Authors:  Satoshi Kanazawa; Deanna L Novak
Journal:  J Biosoc Sci       Date:  2005-09

9.  Evidence for evolution in response to natural selection in a contemporary human population.

Authors:  Emmanuel Milot; Francine M Mayer; Daniel H Nussey; Mireille Boisvert; Fanie Pelletier; Denis Réale
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-10-03       Impact factor: 11.205

10.  Sexually antagonistic selection in human male homosexuality.

Authors:  Andrea Camperio Ciani; Paolo Cermelli; Giovanni Zanzotto
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2008-06-18       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  24 in total

1.  Evolutionary inevitability of sexual antagonism.

Authors:  Tim Connallon; Andrew G Clark
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2013-12-11       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  Perfect genetic correlation between number of offspring and grandoffspring in an industrialized human population.

Authors:  Brendan P Zietsch; Ralf Kuja-Halkola; Hasse Walum; Karin J H Verweij
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2014-01-06       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Quantifying maladaptation during the evolution of sexual dimorphism.

Authors:  Genevieve Matthews; Sandra Hangartner; David G Chapple; Tim Connallon
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2019-08-14       Impact factor: 5.349

4.  Balancing selection in species with separate sexes: insights from Fisher's geometric model.

Authors:  Tim Connallon; Andrew G Clark
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2014-05-08       Impact factor: 4.562

5.  Estimating the sex-specific effects of genes on facial attractiveness and sexual dimorphism.

Authors:  Dorian G Mitchem; Alicia M Purkey; Nicholas M Grebe; Gregory Carey; Christine E Garver-Apgar; Timothy C Bates; Rosalind Arden; John K Hewitt; Sarah E Medland; Nicholas G Martin; Brendan P Zietsch; Matthew C Keller
Journal:  Behav Genet       Date:  2013-11-10       Impact factor: 2.805

6.  The effects of resource availability and the demographic transition on the genetic correlation between number of children and grandchildren in humans.

Authors:  E Bolund; V Lummaa
Journal:  Heredity (Edinb)       Date:  2016-09-14       Impact factor: 3.821

Review 7.  Apolipoprotein E and Sex Bias in Cerebrovascular Aging of Men and Mice.

Authors:  Caleb E Finch; Sara Shams
Journal:  Trends Neurosci       Date:  2016-08-18       Impact factor: 13.837

8.  Assortative mating at loci under recent natural selection in humans.

Authors:  Akihiro Nishi; Marcus Alexander; James H Fowler; Nicholas A Christakis
Journal:  Biosystems       Date:  2019-10-01       Impact factor: 1.973

9.  Evidence of directional and stabilizing selection in contemporary humans.

Authors:  Jaleal S Sanjak; Julia Sidorenko; Matthew R Robinson; Kevin R Thornton; Peter M Visscher
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2017-12-18       Impact factor: 11.205

10.  Does natural selection favour taller stature among the tallest people on earth?

Authors:  Gert Stulp; Louise Barrett; Felix C Tropf; Melinda Mills
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2015-05-07       Impact factor: 5.349

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.