| Literature DB >> 24073883 |
Bodhisatta Nandy1, Vanika Gupta, Sharmi Sen, Niveda Udaykumar, Manas Arun Samant, Syed Zeeshan Ali, Nagaraj Guru Prasad.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Interlocus conflict predicts (a) evolution of traits, beneficial to males but detrimental to females and (b) evolution of aging and life-span under the influence of the cost of bearing these traits. However, there are very few empirical investigations shedding light on these predictions. Those that do address these issues, mostly reported response of male reproductive traits or the lack of it and do not address the life-history consequence of such evolution. Here, we test both the above mentioned predictions using experimental evolution on replicate populations of Drosophila melanogaster. We present responses observed after >45 generations of altered levels of interlocus conflict (generated by varying the operational sex ratio).Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24073883 PMCID: PMC3849880 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2148-13-212
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Evol Biol ISSN: 1471-2148 Impact factor: 3.260
Results of the analyses of body size and behavioural traits
| (A) Dry body weight | Selection regime | 0.003087 | 0.001544 | 2 | 0.000169 | 4 | 9.136 | |
| Block | 0.001205 | 0.000603 | 2 | 0.000169 | 4 | 3.566 | 0.129 | |
| Selection regime × Block | 0.000676 | 0.000169 | 4 | 0.000137 | 77 | 1.232 | 0.304 | |
| (B) Locomotor activity | Selection regime | 0.292 | 0.146 | 2 | 0.011 | 4 | 13.533 | |
| Block | 0.034 | 0.017 | 2 | 0.011 | 4 | 1.584 | 0.311 | |
| Selection regime × Block | 0.043 | 0.011 | 4 | 0.008 | 73 | 1.368 | 0.253 | |
| (C) Courtship frequency | Selection regime | 31.149 | 15.575 | 2 | 1.180 | 4 | 13.204 | |
| Block | 71.673 | 35.836 | 2 | 1.177 | 4 | 30.442 | ||
| Selection regime × Block | 4.700 | 1.175 | 4 | 3.996 | 78 | 0.294 | 0.881 |
Summary of the results of two-factor ANOVA on (A) dry body weight, (B) locomotor activity and (C) courtship frequency, treating selection regime as the fixed factor crossed with random blocks. Dry body weight was measured in groups of five flies and these values were used as the unit of analysis. For the other two traits, vial means were taken as the unit of analysis. p-values in bold case are statistically significant.
Figure 1Response of body size and behavioural traits to selection. (a) Dry weight at eclosion, (b) Courtship frequency and (c) Mean activity score of selection regime males. Individuals were weighed in groups of five. An average body weight was calculated using the weight of the five flies. These mean values were taken as the unit of analysis. Mean activity score (see Methods section) and mean courtship frequency were calculated for each vial using the raw data and these were then used as the unit of analysis. Points not sharing common letter are significantly different (determined using Tukey’s HSD).
Results of the analysis of the data from the mate-harm assay
| Selection regime | 609.96 | 304.98 | 2 | 23.41 | 4 | 13.03 | |
| Mating status | 557.44 | 557.44 | 1 | 90.43 | 2 | 6.16 | 0.131 |
| Block | 184.46 | 92.23 | 2 | 67.24 | 1 | 1.37 | 0.525 |
| Selection regime × Mating status | 129.32 | 64.66 | 2 | 46.60 | 4 | 1.39 | 0.349 |
| Selection regime × Block | 93.60 | 23.40 | 4 | 46.61 | 4 | 0.50 | 0.740 |
| Mating status × Block | 180.89 | 90.45 | 2 | 46.61 | 4 | 1.94 | 0.258 |
| Selection regime × Mating status × Block | 186.42 | 46.61 | 4 | 45.51 | 153 | 1.02 | 0.397 |
Summary of results of three-factor ANOVA using selection regime and mating status as fixed factors crossed with random blocks on the progeny production data. Vial means were taken as the unit of analysis. p-values in bold case are statistically significant.
Figure 2Harming ability of the selection regime males. Mean fitness (progeny production) of LH-females under the experimental conditions: after an exposure to the selection line males for one hour (single mating, SM) and two days (continuously exposure, CE). Total number of progeny produced by all the females in a vial was counted and a mean is calculated using this data. The vial means were then used as the unit of analysis. Points not sharing common letters are significantly different (determined using Tukey’s HSD).
Figure 3Results of the longevity assay. Mean longevity (time to death) of selected males under (a) non-reproducing and (b) reproducing conditions (continuously held with LH-females). A mean longevity was calculated for each vial. These vial means are used as the unit of analysis. (c) LH-female mortality per week. Mortality rate was calculated for each of the nine populations by regressing cumulative weekly mortality across all the replicate vials against time (in weeks). These population level measures of mortality rates were then taken as the unit of analysis. In LH-female mortality rate plot, points not sharing common letter are significantly different (determined using Tukey’s HSD).
Results of the analyses of the data from the longevity assay
| Reproducing | Selection regime | 117.82 | 58.91 | 2 | 44.26 | 4 | 1.33 | 0.360 |
| Block | 115.23 | 57.62 | 2 | 44.26 | 4 | 1.30 | 0.367 | |
| Selection regime × Block | 177.10 | 44.27 | 4 | 18.23 | 78 | 2.43 | 0.055 | |
| Non-reproducing | Selection regime | 745.96 | 372.98 | 2 | 75.26 | 4 | 4.96 | 0.083 |
| Block | 163.93 | 81.96 | 2 | 75.22 | 4 | 1.09 | 0.419 | |
| Selection regime × Block | 301.17 | 75.29 | 4 | 39.28 | 78 | 1.92 | 0.116 | |
| Reproducing | Selection regime | 95.13 | 95.13 | 1 | 2.28 | 2 | 41.69 | |
| Block | 263.86 | 131.93 | 2 | 2.27 | 2 | 58.14 | ||
| Selection regime × Block | 4.54 | 2.27 | 2 | 15.78 | 51 | 0.14 | 0.866 | |
| Non-reproducing | Selection regime | 701.68 | 701.68 | 1 | 2.77 | 2 | 253.66 | |
| Block | 13.74 | 6.87 | 2 | 2.74 | 2 | 2.51 | 0.285 | |
| Selection regime × Block | 5.47 | 2.74 | 2 | 29.35 | 51 | 0.09 | 0.911 | |
| Female mortality | Selection regime | 10.69 | 5.34 | 2 | 1.16 | 4 | 4.60 | 0.092 |
| Block | 9.62 | 4.81 | 2 | 1.16 | 4 | 4.14 | 0.106 | |
| Selection regime × Block | 4.64 | 1.16 | 4 | 4.70 | 81 | 0.25 | 0.911 | |
| Female mortality rate | Selection regime | 5.19 | 2.60 | 2 | 0.25 | 4 | 10.57 | |
| Block | 4.23 | 2.12 | 2 | 0.25 | 4 | 8.62 | ||
Summary of the result of two-factor ANOVA with selection regime as fixed factor crossed with random blocks on (A) mean longevity under “non-reproducing” and “reproducing” treatments with all three regimes included in the analysis, (B) mean longevity under “non-reproducing” and “reproducing” treatments with C-regime excluded from the analysis, and (C) LH-female mortality - female mortality and mortality rate. Except female mortality rate, vial means were taken as the unit of analysis. Mortality rate of each population was calculated and these population level estimates were used as the unit of analysis. p-values in bold case are statistically significant.
Results of the pair-wise analyses of mean longevity using paired t-tests
| M vs. F | −6.6451 | 2 | 0.02 | |
| M vs. C | 1.209229 | 2 | 0.35 | |
| F vs. C | −0.06862 | 2 | 0.95 | |
| M vs. F | −15.7665 | 2 | ||
| M vs. C | −2.02121 | 2 | 0.18 | |
| F vs. C | 0.629118 | 2 | 0.59 |
Population means were taken as the unit of analysis. p-values in bold case are statistically significant.
Figure 4Maintenance protocol for the selection regimes. All the populations are maintained under 25°C, ~60% RH, 12 h:12 h Light/Dark cycle on standard cornmeal-molasses-Yeast media in 14-day discrete generation cycles. Larval density is controlled at approximately 150 per vial (8-10 ml of media). On 10th day post egg collection, adults are collected (using CO2 anaesthesia) and held as virgins (8 per vial). Two days later adults are combined in ‘yeasted’ vials in the sex ratio corresponding to the respective selection regime. After two days of interaction period, flies are transferred to fresh food vials for oviposition and allowed an oviposition window of ~18 hours. Following the oviposition window, flies are discarded and the egg density in the vials is controlled to start the next generation.