Parentage analysis in Chamaelirium luteum (L.) Gray (Liliceae): Why do some males have higher reproductive contributions?

Journal of Evolutionary Biology

Volumn 12, Issue 6, 1999, Pages 1069-1077

  Smouse, P E ^a,b   Meagher, T R ^a   Kobak, C J ^a  

^a RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Chamaelirium luteum; Fitness; Likelihood; Parentage analysis; Pollen dispersal

Indexed keywords

ADAPTATION; FITNESS; REPRODUCTIVE SUCCESS;

CHAMAELIRIUM LUTEUM;

EID: 0032743012     PISSN: 1010061X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1046/j.1420-9101.1999.00114.x     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Adams, W.T. & Birkes, D.S. 1991. Estimating mating patterns in forest tree populations. In: Biochemical Markers in the Population Genetics of Forest Trees (S. Fineschi, M. E. Malvolti, F. Cannata & H. H. Hattemer, eds), pp. 157-172. SBP Academic, The Hague.
2. Adams, W.T., Griffin, A.R. & Moran, G.F. 1992. Using paternity analysis to measure effective pollen dispersal in plant populations. Am. Natur. 140: 762-780.
3. Arnold, S. 1994. Bateman's principles and the measurement of sexual selection in plants and animals. Am. Natur. 144: S126-S149.
4. Arnold, S.J. & Wade, M.J. 1984. On the measurement of natural and sexual selection: applications. Evolution 38: 720-734.
5. Bateman, A.J. 1948. Intrasexual selection in Drosophila. Heredity 2: 349-368.
6. Bell, G. 1985. On the function of flowers. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B 224: 223-265.
7. Bertin, R.I. 1987. Paternity in plants. In: Plant Reproductive Biology: Patterns and Strategies (J. Lovett Doust & L. Lovett Doust, eds), chapter 2. Oxford University Press, New York.
8. Broyles, S.B. & Wyatt, R. 1990. Paternity analysis in a natural population of Asclepias exaltata: multiple paternity, functional gender, and the 'pollen donation' hypothesis. Evolution 44: 1454-1468.
9. Chakraborty, R., Meagher, T.R. & Smouse, P.E. 1988. Parentage analysis with genetic markers in natural populations. I. The expected proportion of offspring with unambiguous paternity. Genetics 118: 527-536.
10. Charlesworth, D., Schemske, D.W. & Sork, V. 1987. The evolution of plant reproductive characters; sexual versus natural selection. In: The Evolution of Sex and its Consequences (S. C. Stearns, ed.), pp. 317-335. Berkhauser-Verlag, Basel.
11. Devlin, B., Clegg, J. & Ellstrand, N.C. 1992. The effects of flower production on male reproductive success in wild radish populations. Evolution 46: 1030-1042.
12. Devlin, B. & Ellstrand, N.C. 1990. Male and female fertility variation in wild radish, a hermaphrodite. Am. Natur. 136: 87-107.
13. Devlin, B., Roeder, K. & Ellstrand, N.C. 1988. Fractional paternity assignment: theoretical development and comparison to other methods. Theor. Appl. Genet. 76: 369-380.
14. Ellstrand, N.C. & Marshall, D.L. 1985. Interpopulation gene flow by pollen in wild radish, Raphanus sativus. Am. Natur. 126: 606-616.
15. Godt, M.J.W. & Hamrick, J.L. 1993. Patterns and levels of pollen-mediated gene flow in Lathryus latifolius. Evolution 47: 98-110.
16. Handel, S.N. 1983. Pollination ecology, plant population structure, and gene flow. In: Pollination Biology (L. Real, ed.), pp. 163-211. Academic Press, New York.
17. Kaufman, S.R., Smouse, P.E. & Alvarez-Buylla, E.R. 1998. Pollen-mediated gene flow and differential male reproductive success in a tropical pioneer tree, Cecropia obtusifolia Bertol. (Moraceae): a paternity analysis. Heredity 81: 164-173.
18. Lande, R. & Arnold, S.J. 1983. The measurement of selection on correlated characters. Evolution 37: 1210-1226.
19. Lloyd, D.G. 1979. Parental strategies of angiosperms. NZ J. Bot. 17: 595-606.
20. Lyons, E.E., Waser, N.M., Price, M.V., Antonovics, J. & Motten, A.F. 1989. Sources of variation in plant reproductive success: a review of the theory. Am. Natur. 134: 409-433.
21. Meagher, T.R. 1981. The population biology of Chamaelirium luteum, a dioecious lily. II. Mechanisms governing sex ratios. Evolution 35: 557-567.
22. Meagher, T.R. 1982. The population biology of Chamaelirium luteum, a dioecious member of the lily family. IV. Two-sex population projections and stable population structure. Ecology 63: 1701-1711.
23. Meagher, T.R. 1986. Analysis of paternity within a natural population of Chamaelirium luteum. I. Identification of most-likely parents. Am. Natur. 128: 199-215.
24. Meagher, T.R. 1991. Analysis of paternity within a natural population of Chamaelirium luteum. II. Male reproductive success. Am. Natur. 137: 738-752.
25. Meagher, T.R. & Antonovics, J. 1982. The population biology of Chamaelirium luteum, a dioecious member of the lily family. III. Life history studies. Ecology 63: 1690-1700.
26. Meagher, T.R. & Thompson, E.A. 1986. The relationship between single parent and parent pair genetic likelihoods in genealogy reconstruction. Theoret. Population Biol. 29: 87-106.
27. Meagher, T.R. & Thompson, E.A. 1987. Analysis of parentage for naturally established seedlings of Chamaelirium luteum. Ecology 68: 803-812.
28. Milligan, B.G. & McMurry, C.K. 1993. Maximum likelihood analysis of male fertility using dominant and codominant genetic markers. Mol. Ecol. 2: 275-283.
29. Mitchell-Olds, T. & Shaw, R.G. 1987. Regression analysis of natural selection: statistical inference and biological interpretation. Evolution 41: 1149-1161.
30. Primack, R.B. & Kang, H. 1989. Measuring fitness and natural selection in wild plant populations. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst 20: 367-396.
31. Roeder, K., Devlin, B. & Lindsay, B.G. 1989. Applications of maximum likelihood methods to population genetic data for the estimation of individual fertilities. Biometrics 45: 363-379.
32. Schoen, D.J. & Stewart, S.C. 1986. Variation in male reproductive investment and male reproductive success in white spruce. Evolution 40: 1109-1120.
33. Schoen, D.J. & Stewart, S.C. 1987. Variation in male fertilities and pairwise mating probabilities in Picea glauca. Genetics 116: 141-152.
34. Smouse, P.E. 1974. Likelihood analysis of geographic variation in allelic frequencies. II. The logit model and an extension to multiple loci. Theoret. Appl. Genetics 45: 52-58.
35. Smouse, P.E. & Meagher, T.R. 1994. Genetic analysis of male reproductive contributions in Chamaelirium luteum (L.) Gray (Liliaceae). Genetics 136: 313-322.
36. Snow, A.A. & Lewis, P.O. 1993. Reproductive traits and male fertility in plants: empirical approaches. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 24: 331-351.
37. Stanton, M.L., Snow, A.A., Handel, S.N. & Bereczley, J. 1989. The impact of flower-color polymorphism on mating patterns in experimental populations of wild radish (Raphanus raphanistrum L.). Evolution 43: 335-346.
38. Stanton, M., Young, H.J., Ellstrand, N.C. & Clegg, J.M. 1991. Consequences of floral variation for male and female reproduction in experimental populations of wild radish, Raphanus sativus L. Evolution 45: 268-280.
39. Stephenson, A.G. & Bertin, R.I. 1983. Male competition, female choice, and sexual selection in plants. In: Pollination Biology (L. Real, ed.), chapter 6. Academic Press, New York.
40. Thompson, E.A. 1986. Pedigree Analysis in Human Genetics. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.
41. Thompson, E.A. & Meagher, T.R. 1987. Parental and sib likelihoods and genealogy reconstruction. Biometrics 43: 585-600.
42. Trivers, R. 1972. Parental investment and sexual selection. In: Sexual Selection and the Descent of Man 1871-1971 (B. Campbell, ed.), pp. 136-179. Heinemann Educational Books Ltd, London.
43. Willson, M.F. 1979. Sexual selection in plants. Am. Natur. 113: 777-790.