| Literature DB >> 33726599 |
Eleanor Bath1, Danielle Edmunds1, Jessica Norman1, Charlotte Atkins1, Lucy Harper1, Wayne G Rostant2, Tracey Chapman2, Stuart Wigby1,3, Jennifer C Perry1,2.
Abstract
Aggressive behaviours are among the most striking displayed by animals, and aggression strongly impacts fitness in many species. Aggression varies plastically in response to the social environment, but we lack direct tests of how aggression evolves in response to intra-sexual competition. We investigated how aggression in both sexes evolves in response to the competitive environment, using populations of Drosophila melanogaster that we experimentally evolved under female-biased, equal, and male-biased sex ratios. We found that after evolution in a female-biased environment-with less male competition for mates-males fought less often on food patches, although the total frequency and duration of aggressive behaviour did not change. In females, evolution in a female-biased environment-where female competition for resources is higher-resulted in more frequent aggressive interactions among mated females, along with a greater increase in post-mating aggression. These changes in female aggression could not be attributed solely to evolution either in females or in male stimulation of female aggression, suggesting that coevolved interactions between the sexes determine female post-mating aggression. We found evidence consistent with a positive genetic correlation for aggression between males and females, suggesting a shared genetic basis. This study demonstrates the experimental evolution of a behaviour strongly linked to fitness, and the potential for the social environment to shape the evolution of contest behaviours.Entities:
Keywords: Drosophila melanogaster; aggression; experimental evolution; sex ratio; sexual conflict; sexual selection
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33726599 PMCID: PMC8059548 DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2020.3053
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Proc Biol Sci ISSN: 0962-8452 Impact factor: 5.349
Figure 1Male aggressive behaviour in Experiment 1—‘coevolved’. Male aggressive behavior after experimental evolution at female-biased (FB), equal (EQ) or male-biased (MB) sex ratios: lunging (a, back-transformed data) and the proportion of aggression performed on food patches (b). Circles indicate means. Grey bars indicate 95% confidence intervals; *** indicates p < 0.001, * indicates 0.01 < p < 0.05, n.s. (not significant) indicates p > 0.05. (Online version in colour.)
Figure 2The relationship between aggression and food patch occupancy within dyads. The relationship between the proportion of aggression (male total aggression and female headbutts) performed by the most aggressive individual in a pair and the proportion of food patch occupancy for that individual, for males (a) and mated females (b) at female-biased (FB), equal (EQ) or male-biased (MB) sex ratios. Grey shading indicates 95% confidence intervals. (Online version in colour.)
Figure 3Female headbutting. Female headbutting after experimental evolution at female-biased (FB), equal (EQ) or male-biased (MB) sex ratios, for virgin (V) or mated (M) females. Female headbutting was measured when experimentally evolved females mated with experimentally evolved males (a; Experiment 1—‘coevolved’), when experimentally evolved females mated with stock males (b; Experiment 2—‘evolved female’; back-transformed data), and when stock females mated with experimentally evolved males (c; Experiment 2—‘evolved male’). Circles indicate means. Grey bars indicate 95% confidence intervals; *** indicates p < 0.001, ** indicates 0.001 < p < 0.01, * indicates 0.01 < p < 0.05, n.s. (not significant) indicates p > 0.05. (Online version in colour.)
Figure 4Correlations between male and female aggressive behaviours. The relationship between male and female aggressive behaviour (male lunges and headbutts by virgin (a) or mated females (b)) and between virgin and mated female headbutts (c). Points are residual values from models controlling for day, time and sex ratio. Lines indicate the monotonic fit from Spearman's correlation; grey shading indicates the 95% confidence interval.