| Literature DB >> 23405907 |
P Zoppoth1, S Koblmüller, K M Sefc.
Abstract
Whether premating isolation is achieved by male-specific, female-specific or sex-independent assortative preferences often depends on the underlying evolutionary processes. Here we test mate preferences of males presented with females of different allopatric colour variants of the cichlid fish Tropheus sp., a Lake Tanganyika endemic with rich geographical colour pattern variation, in which the strength of sexual isolation varies between populations. We conducted two-way mate choice experiments to compare behaviour of males of a red-bodied morph (population Moliro) towards females from their own population with behaviour towards females from four allopatric populations at different stages of phylogenetic and phenotypic divergence. Males courted same-population females significantly more intensely than females of other populations, and reduced their heteromorphic courtship efforts both with increasing genetic and increasing phenotypic distinctness of the females. In particular, females of a closely related red-bodied population received significantly more courtship than either genetically distinct, similarly coloured females ('Kirschfleck' morph) or genetically related, differently coloured females ('yellow-blotch' morph), both of which were courted similarly. Genetically and phenotypically distinct females (Tropheus polli) were not courted at all. Consistent with previous female-choice experiments, female courtship activity also decreased with increasing genetic distance from the males' population. Given successful experimental and natural introgression between colour morphs and the pervasive allopatry of related variants, we consider it unlikely that assortative preferences of both sexes were driven by direct selection during periods of secondary contact or, in turn, drove colour pattern differentiation in allopatry. Rather, we suggest that sexual isolation evolved as by-product of allopatric divergence.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23405907 PMCID: PMC3599476 DOI: 10.1111/jeb.12074
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Evol Biol ISSN: 1010-061X Impact factor: 2.411
Fig. 1Phylogenetic relationships, colour pattern variation and geographical distribution of the Tropheus populations used in this study. The phylogenetic tree of Tropheus populations is based on AFLP data and analyses by Egger ). The coloured bars next to the tree indicate the clades in which the tested populations are placed. Coloured lines along the lake shore represent the distribution of the Tropheus morphs (grey lines: striped Tropheus polli; black lines: ‘Kirschfleck’ morph; yellow lines: the yellow-blotch morph; red lines: the red-bodied morph). Photographs courtesy of Wolfgang Gessl (www.pisces.at).
Generalized linear mixed models (GLMM) estimates (intercepts and effect estimates β with standard errors SE) of the effects of female population on the rates of male courtship quivers. The model was fitted using a negative binomial error distribution (NB2) with a log link function, and male and female identity as crossed random factors. Pairwise comparisons between female populations were carried out by re-running models and alternating the population used as reference. Negative signs of the β values indicate that courtship towards the focus population was less vigorous than towards the reference population
| Reference population (intercept estimate ± SE) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Focus population | Moliro (0.58 ± 0.25) | Ndole (−0.65 ± 0.41) | Chiseketi (−2.04 ± 0.36) | ‘Kirschfleck’ (−2.39 ± 0.37) |
| Ndole | β = −1.22 ± 0.39 | |||
| Chiseketi | β = −2.62 ± 0.33 | β = −1.39 ± 0.44 | ||
| ‘Kirschfleck’ | β = −2.94 ± 0.33 | β = −1.72 ± 0.44 | β = −0.33 ± 0.39 | |
| β = −7.60 ± 1.07 | β = −6.38 ± 1.11 | β = −4.98 ± 1.09 | β = −4.65 ± 1.09 | |
Fig. 2Rates of male and female courtship and body size asymmetry (RSD) between males and females. The regression lines are drawn using the intercepts and slopes estimated by the generalized linear mixed models (GLMM) reported in Table S3. Grey triangles mark the average courtship rates of males and females (omitted in the panel for Tropheus polli).
Fig. 3Rates of aggressive displays by Moliro males against females of different populations (upper panel), and by females of the different populations against Moliro males (lower panel). Different letters above boxplots indicate significant pairwise contrasts within panels [generalized linear mixed models (GLMM) in Tables S4 and S5].