Literature DB >> 29891650

Competition for mates and the improvement of nonsexual fitness.

Li Yun1,2, Patrick J Chen1,2, Kevin E Kwok2, Christopher S Angell2, Howard D Rundle2, Aneil F Agrawal3.   

Abstract

Competition for mates can be a major source of selection, not just on secondary sexual traits but across the genome. Mate competition strengthens selection on males via sexual selection, which typically favors healthy, vigorous individuals and, thus, all genetic variants that increase overall quality. However, recent studies suggest another major effect of mate competition that could influence genome-wide selection: Sexual harassment by males can drastically weaken selection on quality in females. Because of these conflicting effects, the net effect of mate competition is uncertain, although perhaps not entirely unpredictable. We propose that the environment in which mate competition occurs mediates the importance of sexual selection relative to sexual conflict and, hence, the net effect of mate competition on nonsexual fitness. To test this, we performed experimental evolution with 63 fruit fly populations adapting to novel larval conditions where each population was maintained with or without mate competition. In half the populations with mate competition, adults interacted in simple, high-density environments. In the remainder, adults interacted in more spatially complex environments in which male-induced harm is reduced. Populations evolving with mate competition in the complex environment adapted faster to novel larval environments than did populations evolving without mate competition or with mate competition in the simple environment. Moreover, mate competition in the complex environment caused a substantial reduction in inbreeding depression for egg-to-adult viability relative to the other two mating treatments. These results demonstrate that the mating environment has a substantial and predictable effect on nonsexual fitness through adaptation and purging.

Entities:  

Keywords:  adaptation; inbreeding depression; purging; sexual conflict; sexual selection

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29891650      PMCID: PMC6042133          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1805435115

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A        ISSN: 0027-8424            Impact factor:   11.205


  33 in total

1.  Sexual selection fails to promote adaptation to a new environment.

Authors:  Brett Holland
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 3.694

Review 2.  Female choice of sexually antagonistic male adaptations: a critical review of some current research.

Authors:  C Cordero; W G Eberhard
Journal:  J Evol Biol       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 2.411

3.  The roles of natural and sexual selection during adaptation to a novel environment.

Authors:  Howard D Rundle; Stephen F Chenoweth; Mark W Blows
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 3.694

4.  The condition dependency of fitness in males and females: the fitness consequences of juvenile diet assessed in environments differing in key adult resources.

Authors:  Andrea E Zikovitz; Aneil F Agrawal
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2013-06-17       Impact factor: 3.694

Review 5.  Model systems, taxonomic bias, and sexual selection: beyond Drosophila.

Authors:  Marlene Zuk; Francisco Garcia-Gonzalez; Marie Elisabeth Herberstein; Leigh W Simmons
Journal:  Annu Rev Entomol       Date:  2013-10-23       Impact factor: 19.686

6.  Sexual selection counteracts extinction of small populations of the bulb mites.

Authors:  Magdalena Jarzebowska; Jacek Radwan
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2009-11-20       Impact factor: 3.694

7.  Sexual selection protects against extinction.

Authors:  Alyson J Lumley; Łukasz Michalczyk; James J N Kitson; Lewis G Spurgin; Catriona A Morrison; Joanne L Godwin; Matthew E Dickinson; Oliver Y Martin; Brent C Emerson; Tracey Chapman; Matthew J G Gage
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2015-05-18       Impact factor: 49.962

8.  Strong sexual selection in males against a mutation load that reduces offspring production in seed beetles.

Authors:  K Grieshop; J Stångberg; I Martinossi-Allibert; G Arnqvist; D Berger
Journal:  J Evol Biol       Date:  2016-04-04       Impact factor: 2.411

9.  The purging of deleterious mutations in simple and complex mating environments.

Authors:  Julie Colpitts; Darla Williscroft; Harmandeep Singh Sekhon; Howard D Rundle
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 3.703

10.  Environmental complexity and the purging of deleterious alleles.

Authors:  Amardeep Singh; Aneil F Agrawal; Howard D Rundle
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2017-09-20       Impact factor: 3.694

View more
  13 in total

1.  Heightened condition-dependence of the sexual transcriptome as a function of genetic quality in Drosophila melanogaster head tissue.

Authors:  Antonino Malacrinò; Christopher M Kimber; Martin Brengdahl; Urban Friberg
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2019-07-10       Impact factor: 5.349

Review 2.  Linking local adaptation with the evolution of sex differences.

Authors:  Tim Connallon; Florence Débarre; Xiang-Yi Li
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2018-10-05       Impact factor: 6.237

3.  The effects of male harm vary with female quality and environmental complexity in Drosophila melanogaster.

Authors:  Alison MacPherson; Li Yun; Tania S Barrera; Aneil F Agrawal; Howard D Rundle
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2018-08       Impact factor: 3.703

Review 4.  An alternative hypothesis for the evolution of same-sex sexual behaviour in animals.

Authors:  Julia D Monk; Erin Giglio; Ambika Kamath; Max R Lambert; Caitlin E McDonough
Journal:  Nat Ecol Evol       Date:  2019-11-18       Impact factor: 15.460

5.  Genomic evidence that a sexually selected trait captures genome-wide variation and facilitates the purging of genetic load.

Authors:  Jonathan M Parrett; Sebastian Chmielewski; Eylem Aydogdu; Aleksandra Łukasiewicz; Stephane Rombauts; Agnieszka Szubert-Kruszyńska; Wiesław Babik; Mateusz Konczal; Jacek Radwan
Journal:  Nat Ecol Evol       Date:  2022-07-18       Impact factor: 19.100

6.  Softness of selection and mating system interact to shape trait evolution under sexual conflict.

Authors:  Xiang-Yi Li Richter; Brian Hollis
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2021-09-05       Impact factor: 4.171

7.  The evolution of monogamy is associated with reversals from male to female bias in the survival cost of parasitism.

Authors:  Tyler N Wittman; Robert M Cox
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2021-05-12       Impact factor: 5.349

8.  Sexual selection, environmental robustness, and evolutionary demography of maladapted populations: A test using experimental evolution in seed beetles.

Authors:  Ivain Martinossi-Allibert; Emma Thilliez; Göran Arnqvist; David Berger
Journal:  Evol Appl       Date:  2019-02-19       Impact factor: 5.183

Review 9.  The stagnation paradox: the ever-improving but (more or less) stationary population fitness.

Authors:  Hanna Kokko
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2021-11-17       Impact factor: 5.349

10.  Parallel gene expression evolution in natural and laboratory evolved populations.

Authors:  Sheng-Kai Hsu; Chaimae Belmouaden; Viola Nolte; Christian Schlötterer
Journal:  Mol Ecol       Date:  2020-10-12       Impact factor: 6.622

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.