A test of speciation via sexual selection on female preferences

Animal Behaviour

Volumn 64, Issue 6, 2002, Pages 955-965

  Meffert, Lisa M ^a   Regan, Jennifer L ^b  

^a RICE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b The University of Southern Mississippi   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COURTSHIP; FEMALE BEHAVIOR; FLY; MATE CHOICE; MATING BEHAVIOR; PREFERENCE BEHAVIOR; SEXUAL SELECTION; SPECIATION (BIOLOGY);

DIPTERA; DROSOPHILA; MUSCA DOMESTICA; MUSCIDAE;

EID: 0012271446     PISSN: 00033472     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1006/anbe.2002.2020     Document Type: Article

References (78)

1. Andersson, M. 1994. Sexual Selection. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
2. Aragaki, D. L. R. & Meffert, L. M. 1998. A test of how well the repeatability of a courtship trait predicts its heritability. Animal Behaviour, 55, 1141-1150.
3. Arnold, S. J., Verrell, P. A. & Tilley, S. G. 1996. The evolution of asymmetry in sexual isolation: a model and a test case. Evolution, 50, 1024-1033.
4. Aspi, J. 2000. Inbreeding and outbreeding depression in male courtship song characters in Drosophila montana. Heredity, 84, 273-282.
5. Aspi, J. & Hoikkala, A. 2000. male mating success and survival in the field with respect to size and courtship song characters in Drosophila littoralis and D. Montana (Diptera: Drosophilidae). Journal of Insect Behavior, 8, 67-87.
6. Barton, N. H. & Hewitt, G. M. 1985. Analysis of hybrid zones. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 16, 113-148.
7. Bastock, M. 1967. Courtship: an Ethological Study. Chicago: Aldine.
8. Boake, C. R. B. 1985. Genetic consequences of mate choice: a quantitative genetic method for testing sexual selection theory. Science, 227, 1061-1063.
9. Boake, C. R. B. 1989. Repeatability: its role in evolutionary studies of mating behavior. Evolutionary Ecology, 3, 173-182.
10. Boake, C. R. B. & Konigsberg, L. 1998. Inheritance of male courtship behavior, aggressive success, and body size in Drosophila silvestris. Evolution, 52, 1487-1492.
11. Boake, C. R. B., DeAngelis, M. P. & Andreadis, D. K. 1997. Is sexual selection and species recognition a continuum? Mating behavior of the stalk-eyed fly Drosophila heteroneura. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A., 94, 12442-12445.
12. Casares, P., Carracedo, M. C., del Rio, B., Pineiro, R., Garcia-Florez, L. & Barros, A. R. 1998. Disentagling the effects of mating propensity and mating choice in Drosophila. Evolution, 52, 126-133.
13. Crossley, S. A. 1974. Changes in mating behavior produced by selection for ethological isolation between ebony and vestigial mutants of Drosophila melanogaster. Evolution, 28, 631-647.
14. Danley, P. D., Markert, J. A., Arnegard, M. E. & Kocher, T. D. 2000. Divergence with gene flow in rock-dwelling cichlids of Lake Malawi. Evolution, 54, 1725-1737.
15. Endler, J. A. & Houde, A. E. 1995. Geographic variation in female preferences for male traits in Poecilia reticulata. Evolution, 49, 456-468.
16. Falconer, D. S. 1989. Introduction to Quantitative Genetics. 2nd edn. New York: Longman.
17. Fisher, R. A. 1958. The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection. New York: Dover.
18. Grant, P. R. & Grant, B. R. 1995. The founding of a new population of Darwin's finches. Evolution, 49, 229-240.
19. Grant, P. R. & Grant, B. R. 1997a. Genetics and the origin of bird species. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A., 94, 7768-7775.
20. Grant, P. R. & Grant, B. R. 1997b. Hybridization, sexual imprinting, and mate choice. American Naturalist, 149, 1-28.
21. Griffing, B. 1982. A theory of natural selection incorporating interactions among individuals. V. Use of random synchronized groups. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 94, 709-728.
22. Hall, D. W., Kirkpatrick, M. & West, B. 2000. Runaway sexual selection when female preferences are directly selected. Evolution, 54, 1862-1869.
23. Heisler, I. L. 1994. Quantitative genetic models of the evolution of mating behavior. In: Quantitative Genetic Studies of Behavioral Evolution (Ed. by C. R. B. Boake), pp. 101-125. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
24. Hert, E. 1989. The function of egg-spots in an African mouth brooding cichlid fish. Animal Behaviour, 37, 726-732.
25. Isoherranen, E., Aspi, J. & Hoikkala, A. 1999. Variation and consistency of female preferences for simulated courtship songs in Drosophila virilis. Animal Behaviour, 57, 619-625.
26. Iwasa, Y. & Pomiankowski, A. 1995. Continual changes in mate preferences. Nature, 377, 420-422.
27. Iwasa, Y. & Pomiankowski, A. 1999. Good parent and good genes models of handicap evolution. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 200, 97-109.
28. Jang, Y. & Greenfield, M. D. 2000. Quantitative genetics of female choice in an ultrasonic pyralid moth, Achroia grisells: variation and evolvability of preference along multiple dimensions of the male advertisement signal. Heredity, 84, 73-80.
29. Jia, F.-Y., Greenfield, M. D. & Collins, R. D. 2000. Genetic variance of sexually-selected traits in waxmoths: maintenance by genotype x environment interaction. Evolution, 54, 953-967.
30. Kaneshiro, K. Y. 1988. The dynamics of sexual selection and founder effects on species formation. In: Genetics, Speciation, and the Founder Principle (Ed. by L. V. Giddings, K. Y. Kaneshiro & W. W. Anderson), pp. 279-296. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
31. Kence, A. 1986. Spurious frequency-dependent fitness in Drosophila: an artifact caused by marking procedures. American Naturalist, 127, 716-720.
32. Kence, A. & Bryant, E. H. 1978. A model of mating behavior in flies. American Naturalist, 112, 1047-1062.
33. Kirkpatrick, M. 1982. Sexual selection and the evolution of female choice. Evolution, 36, 1-12.
34. Lande, R. 1981. Models of speciation and sexual isolation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A., 78, 3721-3725.
35. Lande, R. & Kirkpatrick, M. 1988. Ecological speciation by sexual selection. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 133, 85-98.
36. Leonard, M. L. & Zanette, L. 1998. Female mate choice and male behaviour in domestic fowl. Animal Behaviour, 56, 1099-1105.
37. Leopold, R. A., Terranova, A. C. & Swilley, E. M. 1971. Mating refusal in Musca domestica: effects of repeated mating and decerebration upon frequency and duration of copulation. Journal of Experimental Zoology, 176, 353-360.
38. Liimatainen, J. O. & Hoikkala, A. 1998. Interactions of the males and females of three sympatric Drosophila virilis-group species, D. montana, L. littoratis, and D. lummei (Diptera, Drosophilidae) in intra- and interspecific courtships in the wild and in the laboratory. Journal of Insect Behavior, 11, 399-417.
39. McCauley, D. E. 1981. Application of the Kence-Bryant model of mating behavior to a natural population of soldier beetles. American Naturalist, 117, 400-402.
40. Martiñez-Wells, M. & Henry, C. H. 1992. The role of courtship songs in reproductive isolation among populations of green lacewings of the genus Chrysoptera (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae). Evolution, 46, 31-42.
41. Markow, T. A. 1981. Courtship behavior and control of reproductive isolation between Drosophila mojavensis and Drosophila arizonensis. Evolution, 35, 1022-1026.
42. Markow, T. A. & Hanson, S. J. 1981. Multivariate analysis of Drosophila courtship. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A., 78, 430-434.
43. Meffert, L. M. 1995. Bottleneck effects on genetic variance for courtship repertoire. Genetics, 139, 365-374.
44. Meffert, L. M. 1999. How speciation experiments relate to conservation biology. BioScience, 49, 701-715.
45. Meffert, L. M. 2000. The evolutionary potential of morphology and mating behavior: the role of epistasis in bottlenecked populations. In: Epistasis and the Evolutionary Process (Ed. by J. B. Wolf, E. D. Brodie & M. J. Wade), pp. 177-193. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
46. Meffert, L. M. & Bryant, E. H. 1991. Mating propensity and courtship behavior in serially bottlenecked lines of the housefly. Evolution, 45, 293-306.
47. Meffert, L. M. & Bryant, E. H. 1992. Divergent ambulatory and grooming behavior in serially bottlenecked lines of the housefly. Evolution, 46, 1399-1407.
48. Meffert, L. M., Regan, J. L. & Brown, B. W. 1999. Convergent evolution of the mating behaviour of founder-flush populations of the housefly. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 12, 859-868.
49. Meffert, L. M., Hicks, S. K. & Regan, J. L. In press. Nonadditive genetic effects in animal behavior. American Naturalist.
50. Meyer, A. 1990. Ecological and evolutionary consequences of trophic polymorphism in Cichlasoma citrinellum (Pices: Cichlidae). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 23, 173-196.
51. Moore, A. J. & Moore, P. J. 1999. Balancing selection through opposing mate choice and male competition. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 226, 711-716.
52. Moore, A. J., Brodie, E. D. III & Wolf, J. B. 1997. Interacting phenotypes and the evolutionary process: I. Direct and indirect effects of social interactions. Evolution, 51, 1352-1362.
53. Mousseau, T. A. & Roff, D. A. 1987. Natural selection and the heritability of fitness components. Heredity, 58, 103-118.
54. Noldus, L. P. J. J. 1990. The Observer Base Package. Version 2.0. Wagenengen, The Netherlands: Noldus Information Technology.
55. Orr, M. R. 1996. Life-history adaptation and reproductive isolation in a grasshopper hybrid zone. Evolution, 50, 706-716.
56. Otte, D. & Endler, J. A. (Eds) 1989. Speciation and Its Consequences. Sunderland, Massachusetts: Sinauer.
57. Payne, R. J. H. & Krakauer, D. C. 1997. Sexual selection, space, and speciation. Evolution, 51, 1-9.
58. Pimentel, R. A. 1979. Morphometrics. The Multivariate Analysis of Biological Data. Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt.
59. Powell, J. R. 1978. The founder-flush speciation theory: an experimental approach. Evolution, 32, 465-474.
60. Price, T. 1998. Sexual selection and natural selection in bird speciation. Philosophical Transaction of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 353, 251-260.
61. Price, T. & Schluter, D. 1991. On the low heritability of life-history traits. Evolution, 45, 853-861.
62. Price, T., Schluter, D. & Heckman, N. E. 1993. Sexual selection when the female directly benefits. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 48, 187-211.
63. Ringo, J., Barton, K. & Dowse, H. 1986. The effect of genetic drift on mating propensity, courtship behavior, and postmating fitness in Drosophila simulans. Behaviour, 97, 226-233.
64. Ritchie, M. G., Townhill, R. M. & Hoikkala, A. 1998. Female preference for fly song: playback experiment confirm the targets of sexual selection. Animal Behaviour, 56, 717-717.
65. Ryan, M. J. & Rand, A. S. 1993. Species recognition and sexual selection as a unitary problem in animal communication. Evolution, 47, 647-657.
66. Sage, R. D. & Selander, R. K. 1979. Hybridization between species of the Rana pipiens complex in central Texas. Evolution, 33, 1069-1088.
67. SAS Institute 1988. SAS/IML. Version 5. Cary, North Carolina: SAS Institute.
68. Schliewen, U. K., Tautz, D. & Nee, S. 1994. Sympatric speciation suggested by monophyly of crater lake cichlids. Nature, 368, 629-632.
69. Sharp, P. M. 1984. The effect of inbreeding on competitive male-mating ability in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics, 106, 601-612.
70. Shaw, F. H., Shaw, R. G., Wilkinson, G. S. & Turrelli, M. 1995. Changes in genetic variances and covariances; G whiz! Evolution, 49, 1260-1267.
71. Shaw, K. L. 2000. Interspecific genetics of mate recognition: inheritance of female acoustic preference in Hawaiian crickets. Evolution, 54, 1303-1312.
72. Simes, R. J. 1986. An improved Bonferroni procedure for multiple tests of significance. Biometrika, 73, 751-754.
73. Takimoto, G., Higashi, M. & Yamamura, N. 2000. A deterministic model for sympatric speciation by sexual selection. Evolution, 54, 1870-1881.
74. Travis, J. & Woodward, B. D. 1989. Social context and courtship flexibility in male sailfin mollies, Poecilia latipinna (Pisces: Poeciliidae). Animal Behaviour, 38, 1001-1011.
75. Turner, G. F. & Burrows, M. T. 1995. A model of sympatric speciation by sexual selection. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 260, 287-292.
76. Uy, J. A. C. & Borgia, G. 2000. Sexual selection drives rapid divergence in bowerbird display traits. Evolution, 54, 273-278.
77. Wilkinson, G. S. & Reillo, P. R. 1994. Female choice response to artificial selection on an exaggerated male trait in a stalk-eyed fly. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 255, 1-6.
78. Wolf, J. B. 2000. Indirect genetic effects and gene interactions. In: Epistasis and the Evolutionary Process (Ed. by J. B. Wolf, E. D. Brodie & M. J. Wade), pp. 158-176. Oxford: Oxford University Press.