The new heterozygosity theory of mate choice and the MHC

Genetica

Volumn 104, Issue 3, 1998, Pages 215-221

  Brown, Jerram L ^a  

^a STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0032452466     PISSN: 00166707     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1026409220292     Document Type: Review

References (87)

1. Andersson, M., 1994. Sexual Selection. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
2. Arcaro, K. & A. Eklund, 1999. A review of MHC-based mate preferences and fostering experiments in two congenic strains of mice. Genetica 104: 241-244.
3. Bakker, T.C.M. & A. Pomiankowski, 1995. The genetic basis of female mate preferences J. Evol. Biol. 8: 129-171.
4. Beauchamp, G.K., K. Yamazaki, J. Bard & E.A. Boyse, 1988. Pre-weaning experience in the control of mating preferences by genes in the major histocompatibility complex of the mouse. Behav. Genet. 18: 537-547.
5. Borgia, G., 1979. Sexual selection and the evolution of mating systems, pp. 19-80 in Sexual Selection and Reproductive Competition in Social Insects, edited by M.S. Blum and N.A. Blum. Academic Press, New York.
6. Briles, W.E., R.W. Briles, R.E. Taffs & H.A. Stone, 1983. Resistance to a malignant lymphoma in chickens is mapped to subregion of major hi stocompatibility (B) complex. Science 219: 977-979.
7. Brncic, D. & S. Koref-Santibanez, 1964. Mating activity of homo-and heterokaryotypes in Drosophilapavani. Genetics 49:5 85-591.
8. Brown, J.L., 1983a. Cooperation - a biologist's dilemma, pp. 1-37 in Advances in the Study of Behavior, edited by J.S. Rosenblatt, R.A. Hinde, C. Beer and M. Busnel. Academic Press, New York.
9. Brown, J.L., 1983b. Some paradoxical goals of cells and organisms: The role of the MHC, pp. 111-124 in Ethical Questions in Brain and Behavior, edited by D.W Pfaff. Springer-Verlag, New York.
10. Brown, J.L., 1994. Mexican Jay, pp. 1-16 in The Birds of North America, edited by A. Poole, P. Stettenheim and F. Gill. Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, American Ornithologists' Union, Philadephia, Washington DC.
11. Charlesworth, B., 1988. The evolution of mate choice in a fluctuating environment. J. Theo. Biol. 130: 191-204.
12. Cothran, E.G., R.K. Chesser, M.H. Smith & P.E. Johns, 1983. Influences of genetic variability and maternal factors on fetal growth in white-tail ed deer. Evolution 37: 282-291.
13. Crocker, G. & T. Day, 1987. An advantage to mate choice in the seaweed fly, Coelopa frigida. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 20: 295-302.
14. Cuthill, I.C. & J.P. Swaddle, 1994. Preference for symmetric males by female zebra finches. Nature 367: 165-166.
15. Darwin, C. 1859. On the Origin of Species. Murray, London.
16. Day, T.H. & R.K. Butlin, 1987. Non-random mating in natural populations of the seaweed fly, Coelopa frigida. Heredity 58: 213-220.
17. Day, T.H., S. Miles, M.D. Pilkington & R.K. Butlin, 1987. Differential mating success in populations of seaweed flies(Coelopa frigida). Heredity 58: 203-212.
18. Dobzhansky, T., 1937. Genetics and the Origin of Species, 1st edn. Columbia Univ. Press, New York.
19. Dobzhansky, T., 1947. Genetics of natural populations: XIV. A response of certain gene arrangements in the third chromosome of D. pseudoobscura to natural selection. Genetics 42: 142-160.
20. Dobzhansky, T. & B. Wallace, 1953. The genetics of homeostasis in Drosophila. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 39: 162-171.
21. Doherty, P.C. & R.M. Zinkernagel, 1975a. A biological role for the major histocompatibility antigens. Lancet i: 1406.
22. Doherty, P.C. & R.M. Zinkernagel, 1975b. Enhanced immunological surveillance in mice heterozygous at the H-2 gene complex. Nature 256: 50-52.
23. Eanes, WR, 1981. Enzyme heterozygosity and morphological variance. Nature 290: 609-610.
24. Ehrman, L. & P.A. Parsons, 1976. The Genetics of Behavior. Sinauer Associates, Inc., Sunderland, MA.
25. Eklund, A.C., 1995. The major histocompatibility complex and mate choice in wild house mice (Mus domesticus). PhD dissertation, State University of New York, Albany.
26. Endler, J.A., 1986. Natural Selection in the Wild. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
27. Fisher, R.A., 1915. The evolution of sexual preference. Eugenics Rev. 7: 184-192.
28. Fisher, R.A., 1930. The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection. Clarendon Press, Oxford.
29. Gaffney, P.M., 1990. Enzyme heterozygosity, growth rate, and viability in Mytilusedulis: Another look. Evolution 44: 204-210.
30. Gilburn, A.A. & T.H. Day, 1994. Evolution of female choice in seaweed flies: Fisherian and good genes mechanisms operate in different populations. Proc. R. Soc. London B 255: 159-165.
31. Hamilton, W.D. & M. Zuk, 1982. Heritable true fitness and bright birds A role for parasites? Science 218: 384-387.
32. Hill, A.V.S., J. Elvin, A.C. Wills, M. Aidoo, C.E.M. Allsopp, F.M. Gotch, X.M. Gao, M. Takiguchi, B.M. Greenwood, A.R.M. Townsend, A.J. McMichael & H. Whittle C, 1992a. Molecular analysis of the association of HLA-B53 and resistance to severe malaria. Nature 360: 434-439.
33. Hill, A.V.S., D. Kwiatkowski, A.J. McMichael, B.M. Greenwood & S. Bennett, 1992b. Reply. Nature 355: 403.
34. Jazwinski, S.M., 1996. Longevity, genes, and aging. Science 273: 54-59.
35. Jones, J.S. & L. Partridge, 1983. Tissue rejection: The price of sexual acceptance? Nature 304: 484-485.
36. Keller, L., 1994. Rewards of promiscuity. Nature 372: 229-230.
37. King, D.P.F., 1985. Enzyme heterozygosity associated with anatomical character variance and growth in the herring (Clupea harengus L.). Heredity 54: 289-296.
38. Klein, J., 1986. Natural History of the Major Histocompatibility Complex. John Wiley & Sons, New York.
39. Klein, J. & D. Klein, 1991. Molecular Evolution of the Major Histocompatibility Complex. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
40. Koehn, R.K., W.J. Diehl & T.M. Scott, 1988. The differential contribution by individual enzymes of glycolysis and protein catabolism to the relationship between heterozygosity and growth rate in the coot cl am, Mulinia lateralis. Genetics 118: 121-130.
41. Koehn, R.K. & P.M. Gaffney, 1984. Genetic heterozygosity and growth rate in Mytilus edulis Marine Biol. 82: 1-7.
42. Leary, R.F., F.W. Allendorf & K.L. Knudsen, 1983. Developmental stability and enzyme heterozygosity in rainbow trout. Nature 301: 71-72.
43. Madsen, T., R. Shine, J. Loman & T. Hakansson, 1992. Why do female adders copulate so frequently? Nature 355: 440-441.
44. Manning, J.T. & M.A. Hartley, 1991. Symmetry and ornamentation are correlated in the peacock's train. Anim. Behav. 42: 1020-1021.
45. Manning, J.T. & L. Ockenden, 1994. Fluctuating asymmetry in racehorses Nature 370: 185-186.
46. Mitton, J.B., 1993. Enzyme heterozygosity, metabolism, and developmental stability. Genetica 89: 47-65.
47. Mitton, J.B., 1997. Selection in Natural Populations Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
48. Mitton, J.B., W.S.F. Schuster, E.G. Cothran & J.C. DeFries, 1993. Correlation between the individual heterozygosity of parents and their offspring. Heredity 71: 59-63.
49. Mitton, J.D. & R.K. Koehn, 1985. Shell shape variation in the blue mussel, Mytilusedulis L., and itsassociation with enzyme heterozygosity. J. Exp. Marine Biol. Ecol. 90: 73-80.
50. Moller, A.P., 1990. Fluctuating asymmetry in male sexual ornaments may reliably reveal male qualty. Anim. Behav. 40: 1185-1187.
51. Moller, A.P., 1992. Female swallow preference for symmetrical male sexual ornaments Nature 357: 238-240.
52. Moller, A.P., 1993. Developmental stability, sexual selection, and the evolution of secondary sexual characters. Etologia 3: 199-208.
53. Moller, A.P., 1996. Sexual selection, viability selection, and developmental stability in the domestic fly Musca domestica. Evolution 50: 746-752.
54. Olsson, M., T. Madsen, R. Shine, A. Gullberg & H. Tegelström, 1994. Can female adders multiply? Nature 369: 528.
55. Parham, R & T. Ohta, 1996. Population biology of antigen presentation by MHC class I molecules. Science 272: 67-74.
56. Partridge, L., 1983. Non-random mating and offspring fitness, pp. 227-255 in Mate Choice, edited by P. Bateson. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
57. Paterson, S. & J.M. Pemberton, 1996. Effects of major histocompatibility complex (MHC) variation on parasite burden and fitness in an unmanaged population of Soay Sheep (Ovisaries L.).
58. Petrie, M., T. Halliday & C. Sanders, 1991. Peahens prefer peacocks with el aborate trains. Anim. Behav. 41: 323-332.
59. Pierce, B.A. & J.B. Mitton, 1982. Allozyme heterozygosity and growth in the tiger salamander Ambystoma tigrinum. J. Heredity 73: 250-253.
60. Pogson, G.H. & E. Zouros, 1994. Allozyme and RFLP heterozygosities as correlates of growth rate in the seall op Placopecten magellanicus: A test of the associative overdominance hypothesis. Genetics 137: 221-231.
61. Robertson, F.W. & E.C. Reeve, 1952. Heterozygosity, environmental variation and heterosis. Nature 179: 286-287.
62. Scribner, K.T. & M.H. Smith, 1990. Genetic variability and antler development, pp. 460-473 in Horns, Pronghorns, and Antlers, edited by G.A. Bubenik and A.B. Bubenik. Springer, New York.
63. Scribner, K.T., M.H. Smith & P.E. Johns, 1989. Environmental and genetic components of antler growth in white-tailed deer. J. Mammal. 70: 284-291.
64. Serradilla, J.M. & F.J. Ayala, 1983. Alloprocoptic selection: A mode of natural selection promoting polymorphism. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 80: 2022-2025.
65. Shull, G.H., 1914. Duplicate genes for capsule form in Bursa bursa pastoris. Z. Ind. Abst. Vererb. 12: 97-149.
66. Singh, S.M. & E. Zouros, 1978. Genetic variation associated with growth rate in the American oyster Crassostrea virginica. Evolution 32: 342-353.
67. Smith, D.A.S., 1975. Sexual selection in a wild population of the butterfly Danaus chrysippus L. Science 187: 664-665.
68. Smith, D.A.S., 1981. Heterozygous advantage expressed through sexual selection in a polymorphic African butterfly. Nature 289: 174-175.
69. Soule, M.E. & S.Y. Yang, 1974. Genetic variation inside-blotched lizardson islands in the Gulf of California. Evolution 27: 593-600.
70. Spiess, E. & B. Langer, 1966. Mating control by gene arrangements in Drosophila pseudoobscura. Genetics 54: 1139-1149.
71. Swaddle, J.P. & M.S. Witter, 1994. Food, feathers and fluctuating asymmetry. Proc. R. Soc. London B 255: 147-152.
72. Thornhill, R., 1992a. Female preference for the pheromone of males with low fluctuating asymmetry in the Japanese scorpionfly (Panorpa japonica: Mecoptera). Behav. Ecol. 3: 277-283.
73. Thornhill, R., 1992b. Fluctuating asymmetry and the mating system of the Japanese scorpionfly. Anim. Behav. 44: 867-879.
74. Thornhill, R. & S. Gangestad, 1993. Human facial beauty: Averageness, symmetry and parasite pressure. Human Nature 4: 237-269.
75. von Schantz, T., H. Wittzell, G. Goransson, M. Grahn & K. Persson, 1996. MHC genotype and male ornamentation: Genetic evidence for the Hamilton-Zuk model. Proc. R. Soc. London B 263:265-271.
76. Vrijenhoek, R.V. & S. Lerman, 1982. Heterozygosity and developmental stability under sexua and asexual breeding systems. Evolution 36: 767-768.
77. Watt, W.B. & C.L. Boggs, 1987. Allelic isozymes as probes of the evolution of metabolic organization, pp. 27-47 in Isozymes: Current Topics in Biological and Medical Research, edited by M.C. Rattazzi, J.C. Scandalios and G.S. Whitt. Alan R. Liss, Inc., New York.
78. Watt, W.B., P.A. Carter & S.M. Blower, 1985. Adaptation at specificloci: IV. Differentia mating success among glycolytic allozyme genotypes of Colias butterflies. Genetics 109: 157-175.
79. Watt, W.B., P.A. Carter & K. Donohue, 1986. Females' choice of "good genotypes" as mates is promoted by an insect mating system. Science 233: 1187-1190.
80. Wilcockson, R.W, C.S. Crean & T.H. Day, 1995. Heritability of a sexually selected character expressed in both sexes Nature 374: 158-159.
81. Williams, G.C., 1966. Adaptation and Natural Selection. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton.
82. Yamazaki, K., G.K. Beauchamp, D. Kupniewski, J. Bard, L. Thomas & E.A. Boyse, 1988. Familial imprinting determines H-2 selective mating preferences Science 240: 1331-1332.
83. Yamazaki, K., E.A. Boyse, V. Mike, H.T. Thaler, B.J. Mathieson, J. Abbott, J. Boyse & Z.A. Zayas, 1976. Control of mating preferences in mice by genes in the major histocompatibility complex. J. Exp. Med. 144: 1324-1335.
84. Yezerinac, S.M., S.C. Lougheed & P. Handford, 1992. Morphological variability and enzyme heterozygosity: Individual and population level correlations. Evolution 46: 1959-1964.
85. Zahavi, A., 1975. Mate selection-a selection for a handicap. J. Theo. Biol. 53: 205-214.
86. Zouros, E., 1987. On the relationship between heterozygosity and heterosis: An evaluation of the evidence from marine mollusks, pp. 255-270 in Isozymes: Current Topics in Biological and Medical Research, edited by M.C. Rattazzi, J.G. Scandalios and G.S. Whitt. Alan R. Liss, Inc., New York.
87. Zouros, E. & D.W. Foltz, 1987. The use of all elic isozyme variation for the study of heterosis, pp. 1-59 in Isozymes: Current Topics in Biological and Medical Research, edited by M.C. Rattazzi, J.C. Scandalios and G.S. Whitt. Alan R. Liss, Inc., New York.