| Literature DB >> 27878080 |
Elaine S Rood1, Steven Freedberg1.
Abstract
Maternal sex ratio distorters (MSDs) are selfish elements that enhance their transmission by biasing their host's sex allocation in favor of females. While previous models have predicted that the female-biased populations resulting from sex ratio distortion can benefit from enhanced productivity, these models neglect Fisherian selection for nuclear suppressors, an unrealistic assumption in most systems. We used individual-based computer simulation modeling to explore the intragenomic conflict between sex ratio distorters and their suppressors and explored the impacts of these dynamics on population-level competition between species characterized by MSDs and those lacking them. The conflict between distorters and suppressors was capable of producing large cyclical fluctuations in the population sex ratio and reproductive rate. Despite fitness costs associated with the distorters and suppressors, MSD populations often exhibited enhanced productivity and outcompeted non-MSD populations in single and multiple-population competition simulations. Notably, the conflict itself is beneficial to the success of populations, as sex ratio oscillations limit the competitive deficits associated with prolonged periods of male rarity. Although intragenomic conflict has been historically viewed as deleterious to populations, our results suggest that distorter-suppressor conflict can provide population-level advantages, potentially helping to explain the persistence of sex ratio distorters in a range of taxa.Entities:
Keywords: genetic conflict; population sex ratio; population‐level selection; sex ratio distorter
Year: 2016 PMID: 27878080 PMCID: PMC5108260 DOI: 10.1002/ece3.2498
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ecol Evol ISSN: 2045-7758 Impact factor: 2.912
Figure 1Population sex ratio associated with distorter and suppressor allele dynamics. In one‐distorter simulations, population sex ratios fluctuated between female biased when the distorting cytotype was common and 1:1 when the wild cytotype was common (a). In two‐distorter simulations, the alternating relationship between the two distorting cytotypes allowed female biases to be maintained consistently throughout the simulations (b). Distorter cost (δ) = 0.2; suppressor cost (λ) = 0.05
Figure 2Invasion success of an MSD population invading a nondistorting population in the single population scenario. Distorting populations varied in number of distorters (1D vs 2D) and distorter (δ) and suppressor (λ) costs
Figure 3Establishment success of an MSD population competing against a nondistorting population in the multiple‐population scenario. Distorting populations varied in distorter (δ) and suppressor (λ) costs
Figure 4Time (generations) to displacement in multiple‐population simulations for one‐distorter and two‐distorter simulations. Competition was initiated after a 500 generation inoculation period
Figure 5The effects of distorter sex ratios on average population sex ratios and suppressor frequencies. For two‐distorter simulations, suppressor frequency represents the average of both alleles