| Literature DB >> 23895372 |
Andra Thiel1, Anne C Weeda, Jetske G de Boer, Thomas S Hoffmeister.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Allelic incompatibility between individuals of the same species should select for mate choice based on the genetic make-up of both partners at loci that influence offspring fitness. As a consequence, mate choice may be an important driver of allelic diversity. A complementary sex determination (CSD) system is responsible for intraspecific allelic incompatibility in many species of ants, bees, and wasps. CSD may thus favour disassortative mating and in this, resembles the MHC of the vertebrate immune system, or the self-incompatibility (SI) system of higher plants.Entities:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23895372 PMCID: PMC3734144 DOI: 10.1186/1742-9994-10-43
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Zool ISSN: 1742-9994 Impact factor: 3.172
Figure 1reproductive biology. Matched matings in parental generation P result in three kinds of offspring: diploid homozygous males (F1 on the left; identical colour bands on chromosomes), diploid heterozygous females (F1 centre; different colour bands), or haploid hemizygous males, from unfertilized eggs (F1 on the right).
Figure 2habitus. A female with inserted ovipositor sitting on a paralyzed host (photo: Nils Linek).
Figure 3Mate choice consequences. The proportion (± SE) of all diploid offspring produced that is male and thus, costly (***P < 0.001).
Numbers of eggs produced, haploid male (HM), diploid male (DM), female (F), undetermined male (UM) offspring, and the probability that a matched mating by chance did not result in diploid male production (matching probability, calculated as 0.5)
| 1 | Accepted | 17 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0.0625 |
| 2 | Accepted | 73 | 8 | 0 | 25 | 4 | <0.0001 |
| 3 | Accepted | 10 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 0.0010 |
| 4 | Accepted | 18 | 3 | 0 | 8 | 0 | 0.0039 |
| 5 | Accepted | 69 | 5 | 0 | 55 | 0 | <0.0001 |
| 6 | Accepted | 33 | 20 | 2 | 4 | 4 | Matched |
| 7 | Accepted | 30 | 4 | 0 | 11 | 0 | 0.0005 |
| 8 | Accepted | 37 | 1 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 0.0078 |
| 9 | Accepted | 31 | 10 | 0 | 9 | 0 | 0.0020 |
| 10 | Accepted | 38 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 0.0078 |
| 11 | Accepted | 33 | 1 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 0.0078 |
| 12 | Rejected | 45 | 4 | 7 | 11 | 0 | Matched |
| 13 | Rejected | 22 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 2 | Matched |
| 14 | Rejected | 27 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 0 | Matched |
| 15 | Rejected | 56 | 20 | 6 | 11 | 5 | Matched |
| 16 | Rejected | 52 | 21 | 2 | 10 | 5 | Matched |
| 17 | Rejected | 23 | 13 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0.1250 |
| 18 | Rejected | 31 | 9 | 0 | 8 | 0 | 0.0039 |
| 19 | Rejected | 34 | 8 | 0 | 13 | 0 | 0.0001 |
| 20 | Rejected | 34 | 3 | 6 | 8 | 0 | Matched |
| 21 | Control | 10 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | Matched |
| 22 | Control | 38 | 11 | 5 | 3 | 1 | Matched |
| 23 | Control | 51 | 9 | 0 | 1 | 0 | Matched |
| 24 | Control | 7 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | Matched |
| 25 | Control | 26 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 2 | Matched |
| 26 | Control | 34 | 9 | 6 | 6 | 0 | Matched |
| 27 | Control | 41 | 2 | 7 | 11 | 1 | Matched |
| 28 | Control | 54 | 25 | 0 | 1 | 1 | Matched |
| 29 | Control | 18 | 9 | 0 | 3 | 0 | Matched |
Matings are considered matched if DM were produced and in all replicates of the control group (see above). Wasps 1 and 17 were omitted from statistical comparison of matched matings (Fisher test), since the matching probability > 0.05 did not allow for unambiguous classification. Including these data points either as matched or unmatched does not change the conclusions from the Fisher test.
Figure 4Flow cytometry reference histograms. Since DNA duplication is common in Hymenoptera, a haploid individual (right side) is recognized by the presence of a haploid peak, in addition to diploid and tetraploid peaks. A diploid individual is defined by the absence of a haploid peak, while at the same time, diploid and tetraploid peaks are present (left side).