Male eye span in stalk-eyed flies indicates genetic quality by meiotic drive suppression

Nature

Volumn 391, Issue 6664, 1998, Pages 276-279

  Wilkinson, Gerald S ^a   Presgraves, Daven C ^b   Crymes, Lili ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

GENETIC QUALITY; MATE CHOICE; MEIOTIC DRIVE SUPPRESSION; SE RATIO; SEXUAL SELECTION; STALK-EYED FLY;

ANIMAL CELL; ARTICLE; CHROMOSOME ANALYSIS; EYE DEVELOPMENT; FLY; GENETIC LINKAGE; MATING; NONHUMAN; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SEX DIFFERENCE; SPECIES DIFFERENTIATION; SURVIVAL;

CYRTODIOPSIS; DIOPSIDAE; DIPTERA;

EID: 0032518279     PISSN: 00280836     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/34640     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Norris, K. Heritable variation in a plumage indicator of viability in male great tits, Parus major. Nature 362, 537-539 (1993).
2. Møller, A. P. Male ornament size as a reliable cue to enhanced offspring viability in the bar swallow. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 91, 6929-6932 (1994).
3. Petrie, M. Improved growth and survival of offspring of peacocks with more elaborate trains. Nature 371, 598-599 (1994).
4. Hassellquist, D., Bensch, S. & von Schantz, T. Correlation between male song repertoire, extra-pair paternity and offspring survival in the great reed warbler. Nature 381, 229-232 (1996).
5. Sheldon, B. C., Merilä, J., Qvarnström, A., Gustafsson, L. & Ellegren, H. Paternal genetic contribution to offspring condition predicted by size of male secondary sexual character. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 264, 297-302 (1997).
6. Pomiankowski, A. The evolution of female mate preferences for male genetic quality. Oxf. Surv. Evol. Biol. 5, 136-184 (1988).
7. Heywood, J. S. Sexual selection by the handicap mechanism. Evolution 43, 1387-1397 (1989).
8. Iwasa, Y., Pomiankowski, A. & Nee, S. The evolution of costly mate preferences. II. The "handicap" principle. Evolution 45, 1431-1442 (1991).
9. Burt, A. Perspective: the evolution of fitness. Evolution 49, 1-8 (1995).
10. Kirkpatrick, M. & Barton, N. H. The strength of indirect selection on female mating preferences. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 94, 1282-1286 (1997).
11. Burkhardt, D. & de la Motte, I. Selective pressures, variability, and sexual dimorphism in stalk-eyed flies (Diopsidae). Naturwissenschaften 72, 204-206 (1985).
12. Wilkinson, G. S. & Dodson, G. Function and evolution of anders and eyestalks in flies. in The Evolution of Mating Systems in Insects and Arachnids (eds Choe, J. & Crespi, B.) (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1997).
13. Burkhardt, D. & de la Motte, I. Big 'antlers' are favoured: female choice in stalk-eyed flies (Diptera, Insecta), field collected harems and laboratory experiments. J. Comp. Physiol. A 162, 649-652 (1988).
14. Wilkinson, G. S. & Reillo, P. R. Female preference response to artificial selection on an exaggerated male trait in a stalk-eyed fly. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 255, 1-6 (1994).
15. Presgraves, D. C., Severence, E. & Wilkinson, G. S. Sex chromosome meiotic drive in stalk-eyed flies. Genetics 147, 1169-1180 (1997).
16. Fisher, R. A. The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection (Dover, New York, 1958).
17. Burkhardt, D. & de la Motte, I. How stalk-eyed flies eye stalk-eyed flies: observations and measurements of the eyes of Cyrtodiopsis whitei (Diopsidae, Diptera). J. Comp. Physiol. 151, 407-421 (1983).
18. Burkhardt, D., de la Motte, I. & Lunau, K. Signalling fitness: larger males sire more offspring. Studies of the stalk-eyed fly Cyrtodiopsis whitei (Diopsidae, Diptera). J. Comp. Physiol A 174, 61-64 (1994).
19. Wilkinson, G. S. Artificial sexual selection alters allometry in the stalk-eyed fly Cyrtodiopsis dalmanni (Diptera: Diopsidae). Genet. Res. 62, 213-222 (1993).
20. Lenington, S. The t complex: a story of genes, behavior, and populations. Adv. Study Behav. 20, 51-86 (1991).
21. Wu, C.-I. The fate of autosomal modifiers of the sex-ratio trait in Drosophila and other Sex linked meiotic drive systems. Theor. Popul Biol 24, 107-120 (1983).
22. Carvalho, A. B.,Vaz, S. C. & Klaczko, L. B. Polymorphism for Y-linked suppressors of sex-ratio in two natural populations of Drosophila mediopunctata. Genetics 146, 891-902 (1997).
23. Montchamp-Moreau, C., Cazemajor, M. & Landré, C. The sex ratio trait in Drosophila simulans: genetic analysis of distortion and suppression. Genetics (in the press).
24. Stalker, H. D. The genetic systems modifying meiotic drive in Drosophila paramelanica. Genetics 46, 177-202 (1961).
25. Hurst, L & Pomiankowski, A. Causes of sex ratio bias may account for unisexual sterility in hybrids: a new explanation of Haldane's rule and related phenomenon. Genetics 128, 841-858 (1991).
26. Jaenike, J. Sex-ratio meiotic drive in the Drosophila quinaria group. Am. Nat. 148, 237-254 (1996).
27. Farr, J. A. Biased sex ratios in laboratory strains of guppies, Poecilia reticulata. Heredity 47, 237-248 (1981).
28. Houde A. E. Mate choice based upon naturally occurring color-pattern variation in a guppy population. Evolution 41, 1-10 (1987).
29. Houde, A. E. Sex-linked heritability of a sexually-selected character in a natural population of guppies, Poecilia reticulata (Pisces: Poecilidae). Heredity 69, 229-235 (1992).
30. Hurst, L. D. Further evidence consistent with Stellate's involvement in meiotic drive. Genetics 142, 641-643 (1996).