The cost of sex revisited: Effects of male gamete output of hermaphrodites that are asexual in their female capacity

Journal of Theoretical Biology

Volumn 195, Issue 4, 1998, Pages 533-542

  Joshi, Amitabh ^a,b   Moody, Michael E ^a,c  

^a WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b JAWAHARLAL NEHRU CENTRE FOR ADVANCED SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH   (India)

^c HARVEY MUDD COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; EGG; FERTILIZATION; GAMETE; GENETIC MODEL; HERMAPHRODITISM; PARTHENOGENESIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REPRODUCTION; SEX;

EID: 0032556670     PISSN: 00225193     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1006/jtbi.1998.0811     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. ASKER, S. & JERLING, L. (1992). Apomixis in Plants. Boca Raton: CRC Press.
2. BELL, G. (1982). The Master-piece of Nature. Berkeley: University of California Press.
3. CHARLESWORTH, B. (1980). The cost of sex in relation to mating system. J. theor. Biol. 84, 655-671.
4. CROW, J. F. & KIMURA, M. (1965). Evolution in sexual and asexual populations Am. Nat. 99, 439-450.
5. FISHER, R. A. (1930). The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
6. GAGGIOTTI, O. E. (1994). An ecological model for the maintenance of sex and geographic parthenogenesis. J. theor. Biol. 167, 201-221.
7. HAMILTON, W. D., AXELROD, R. & TANESE, R. (1990). Sexual reproduction as an adaptation to resist parasites (a review). Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 87, 3566-3573.
8. JOSHI, A. & MOODY, M. E. (1995). Male gamete output of parthenogenetic hermaphrodites and the dynamics of populations polymorphic for reproductive mode. J. theor. Biol. 174, 189-197.
9. JOSHI, A. & THOMPSON, J. N. (1995). Alternative routes to the evolution of competitive ability in two competing species of Drosophila. Evolution 49, 616-625.
10. JOSHI, A., OSHIRO, W. A., SHIOTSUGU, J. & MUELLER, L. D. (1997). Within-and among-population variation in oviposition preference for urea-supplemented food in Drosophila melanogaster. J. Biosci. 22, 325-338.
11. LLOYD, D. G. (1980). Benefits and handicaps of sexual reproduction. Evol. Biol. 13, 69-111.
12. LLOYD, D. G. (1988). Benefits and costs of biparental and uniparental reproduction in plants. In: The Evolution of Sex (Michod, R. E. & Levin, B. R., eds), pp. 233-252. Sunderland: Sinauer.
13. MAYNARD SMITH, J. (1968). Evolution in sexual and asexual populations. Am. Nat. 102, 469-473.
14. MAYNARD SMITH, J. (1971). The origin and maintenance of sex. In: Group Selection (Williams, G. C., ed.), pp. 163-175. Chicago: Aldine-Atherton.
15. MAYNARD SMITH, J. (1978). The Evolution of Sex. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
16. MOGIE, M. (1990). Homospory and the cost of asexual reproduction. Evolution 44, 1707-1710.
17. MOGIE, M. (1992). The Evolution of Asexual Reproduction in Plants. London: Chapman & Hall.
18. MOGIE, M. & FORD, H. (1988). Sexual and asexual Taraxacum species. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 35, 155-168.
19. MULLER, H. J. (1932). Some genetic aspects of sex. Am. Nat. 66, 118-138.
20. RAMEAU, C. & GOUYON, P. H. (1991). Resource allocation to growth, reproduction,and survival in Gladiolus: the cost of male function. J. evol. Biol. 4, 291-307.
21. Ross, M. (1990). Sexual asymmetry in hermaphroditic plants. Trends Ecol. Evol. 5, 43-47.
22. ROUGHGARDEN, J. (1991). The evolution of sex. Am. Nat. 138, 934-953.
23. SHIELDS, W. M. (1988). Sex and adaptation. In: The Evolution of Sex (Michod, R. E. & Levin, B. R., eds), pp. 253-269. Sunderland: Sinauer.
24. SOROKINA, T. P. (1976). Study of meiosis in the Siberian species Potentilla dealbata (2n = 14) and P. argentea (2n = 42). In: Apomixis and its Role in Evolution and Breeding (Petrov, D. F., ed.), pp. 194-200. New Delhi: Amerind.
25. THOMPSON, J. N. (1994a). The Coevolutionary Process. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
26. THOMPSON, J. N. (1994b). The geographic mosaic of evolving interactions. In: Individuals, Populations, and Patterns in Ecology (Leather, S. R. et al., eds), pp. 419-432. Andover: Intercept Press.
27. TREISMAN, M. & DAWKINS, R. (1976). The cost of meiosis: is there any? J. theor. Biol. 63, 479-484.
28. UYENOYAMA, M. K. (1984). On the evolution of parthenogenesis: a genetic representation of the cost of "meiosis". Evolution 38, 87-102.
29. UYENOYAMA, M. K. (1985). On the evolution of parthenogenesis. II. Inbreeding and the cost of meiosis. Evolution 39, 1194-1206.
30. WEISMANN, A. (1889). The significance of sexual reproduction in the theory of natural selection. In: Essays upon Heredity and Kindred Biological Problems (Poulton, E. B. et al., eds), pp. 254-338, Vol. 1, 2nd Edn. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
31. WILLIAMS, G. C. (1975). Sex and Evolution. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
32. WILLIAMS, G. C. (1980). Kin-selection and the paradox of sexuality. In: Sociobiology: Beyond Nature/Nurture (Barlow, G. W. & Silverberg, J., eds), pp. 371-385. Boulder: Westview Press.
33. WILLIAMS, G. C. (1988). Retrospect on sex and kindred topics. In: The Evolution of Sex (Michod, R. E. & Levin, B. R., eds), pp. 287-298. Sunderland: Sinauer.
34. YUDIN, B. F. & LUKINA, L. A. (1976). Experimental automictic parthenogenesis in maize. In: Apomixis and its Role in Evolution and Breeding (Petrov, D. F., ed.), pp. 125-146. New Delhi: Amerind.