Sex may need more than one

Journal of Evolutionary Biology

Volumn 12, Issue 6, 1999, Pages 1053-1055

  West, S A ^a   Lively, C M ^b   Read, A F ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

^b INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Mutation; Parasites; Recombination; Red Queen; Sex

Indexed keywords

EID: 0032698507     PISSN: 1010061X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1046/j.1420-9101.1999.00134.x     Document Type: Note

References (27)

1. Barton, N.H. 1995. A general model for the evolution of recombination. Genet. Res. 65: 123-144.
2. Birky, C.W. Jr. 1999. An even broader perspective on sex and recombination. J. Evol. Biol. 12: 1013-1016.
3. Burt, A. & Bell, G. 1987. Mammalian chiasma frequencies as a test of two theories of recombination. Nature 326: 803-805.
4. Butlin, R.K., Schön, I. & Martens, K. 1999. Origin, age and diversity of clones. J. Evol. Biol. 12: 1020-1022.
5. Charlesworth, B. 1976. Recombination modification in a fluctuating environment. Genetics 83: 181-195.
6. Charlesworth, B. 1987. Red Queen versus Tangled Bank models. Nature 330: 116-117.
7. Charlesworth, B. 1990. Mutation-selection balance and the evolutionary advantage of sex and recombination. Genet. Res. 55: 199-221.
8. Charnov, E.L. 1982. The Theory of Sex Allocation. Princeton University Press, USA.
9. Crow, J.F. 1999. The omnipresent process of sex. J. Evol. Biol. 12: 1023-1025.
10. Elena, S.F. & Lenski, R.E. 1997. Test of synergistic interactions among deleterious mutations in bacteria. Nature 390: 395-398.
11. Falush, D. 1998. The evolution of recombination rates caused by recurrent deleterious mutations. PhD Thesis, University of London.
12. Gemmill, A., Viney, M.E. & Read, A.F. 1997. Host immune status determines sexuality in a parasitic nematode. Evolution 51: 393-401.
13. Godfray, H.C.J. & Werren, J.H. 1996. Recent developments in sex ratio studies. Trends Ecol. Evol. 11: 59-63.
14. Gouyon, P.-H. 1999. Sex: a pluralist approach includes species selection. (One step beyond and it's good.) J. Evol. Biol. 12: 1029-1030.
15. Hilborn, R. & Stearns, S.C. 1982. On inference in ecology and evolutionary biology: the problem of multiple causes. Acta Biotheoretica 31: 145-164.
16. Howard, R.S. 1994. Selection against deleterious mutations and the maintenance of biparental sex. Theor. Pop. Biol. 45: 313-323.
17. Hurst, L.D. & Smith, N.G.C. 1998. The evolution of concerted evolution. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B 265: 121-127.
18. Kondrashov, A.S. 1982. Selection against harmful mutations in large sexual and asexual populations. Genet. Res. 40: 325-332.
19. Kondrashov, A.S. 1999. Being too nice may be not too wise. J. Evol. Biol. 12: 1031.
20. Lenski, R.E. 1999. A distinction between the origin and maintenance of sex. J. Evol. Biol. 12: 1034-1035.
21. Otto, S.P. & Feldman, M.W. 1997. Deleterious mutations, variable epistatic interactions, and the evolution of recombination. Theor. Popul. Biol. 51: 134-147.
22. Peters, A.D. & Lively, C.M. in press. The Red Queen and fluctuating epistasis: a population genetic analysis of antagonistic coevolution. Am. Nat.
23. Redfield, R.J. 1999. A truly pluralistic view of sex and recombination. J. Evol. Biol. 12: 1043-1046.
24. Seger, J. 1999. Is sex in the details? J. Evol. Biol. 12: 1050-1052.
25. Szathmary, E. 1993. Do deleterious mutations act synergistically? Metabolic control theory provides a partial answer. Genetics 133: 127-132.
26. West, S.A., Lively, C.M. & Read, A.F. 1999. A pluralist approach to sex and recombination. J. Evol. Biol. 12: 1003-1012.
27. West, S.A., Peters, A. & Barton, N.H. 1998. Testing for epistasis between deleterious mutations. Genetics 149: 435-444.