Literature DB >> 29209956

Cross-sex genetic correlation does not extend to sexual size dimorphism in spiders.

Eva Turk1, Matjaž Kuntner2,3,4,5, Simona Kralj-Fišer2,6.   

Abstract

Males and females are often subjected to different selection pressures for homologous traits, resulting in sex-specific optima. Because organismal attributes usually share their genetic architectures, sex-specific selection may lead to intralocus sexual conflict. Evolution of sexual dimorphism may resolve this conflict, depending on the degree of cross-sex genetic correlation (r MF) and the strength of sex-specific selection. In theory, high r MF implies that sexes largely share the genetic base for a given trait and are consequently sexually monomorphic, while low r MF indicates a sex-specific genetic base and sexual dimorphism. Here, we broadly test this hypothesis on three spider species with varying degrees of female-biased sexual size dimorphism, Larinioides sclopetarius (sexual dimorphism index, SDI = 0.85), Nuctenea umbratica (SDI = 0.60), and Zygiella x-notata (SDI = 0.46). We assess r MF via same-sex and opposite-sex heritability estimates. We find moderate body mass heritability but no obvious patterns in sex-specific heritability. Against the prediction, the degree of sexual size dimorphism is unrelated to the relative strength of same-sex versus opposite-sex heritability. Our results do not support the hypothesis that sexual size dimorphism is negatively associated with r MF. We conclude that sex-specific genetic architecture may not be necessary for the evolution of a sexually dimorphic trait.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cross-sex genetic correlation; Heritability; Pedigree; Sex-specific optimum; Sexual dimorphism; Trait evolution

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29209956     DOI: 10.1007/s00114-017-1529-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Naturwissenschaften        ISSN: 0028-1042


  24 in total

1.  Intralocus sexual conflict can drive the evolution of genomic imprinting.

Authors:  Troy Day; Russell Bonduriansky
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 4.562

2.  An ecologist's guide to the animal model.

Authors:  Alastair J Wilson; Denis Réale; Michelle N Clements; Michael M Morrissey; Erik Postma; Craig A Walling; Loeske E B Kruuk; Daniel H Nussey
Journal:  J Anim Ecol       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 5.091

3.  Sexual selection, genetic architecture, and the condition dependence of body shape in the sexually dimorphic fly Prochyliza xanthostoma (Piophilidae).

Authors:  Russell Bonduriansky; Locke Rowe
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 3.694

Review 4.  Intralocus sexual conflict.

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

5.  SEXUAL DIMORPHISM, SEXUAL SELECTION, AND ADAPTATION IN POLYGENIC CHARACTERS.

Authors:  Russell Lande
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  1980-03       Impact factor: 3.694

6.  Laboratory estimates of heritabilities and genetic correlations in nature.

Authors:  B Riska; T Prout; M Turelli
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  1989-12       Impact factor: 4.562

7.  Development and growth in synanthropic species: plasticity and constraints.

Authors:  Simona Kralj-Fišer; Tatjana Čelik; Tjaša Lokovšek; Klavdija Šuen; Rebeka Šiling; Matjaž Kuntner
Journal:  Naturwissenschaften       Date:  2014-06-05

8.  Evolutionary genetics of lifespan and mortality rates in two populations of the seed beetle, Callosobruchus maculatus.

Authors:  C W Fox; M L Bush; D A Roff; W G Wallin
Journal:  Heredity (Edinb)       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 3.821

9.  A change in competitive context reverses sexual selection on male size.

Authors:  M M Kasumovic; M C B Andrade
Journal:  J Evol Biol       Date:  2008-11-11       Impact factor: 2.411

10.  No intra-locus sexual conflict over reproductive fitness or ageing in field crickets.

Authors:  Felix Zajitschek; John Hunt; Susanne R K Zajitschek; Michael D Jennions; Robert Brooks
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2007-01-17       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  1 in total

1.  Sex differences in the genetic architecture of aggressiveness in a sexually dimorphic spider.

Authors:  Simona Kralj-Fišer; Kate L Laskowski; Francisco Garcia-Gonzalez
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2019-08-22       Impact factor: 2.912

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.