Dynamical instabilities lead to sympatric speciation

Evolutionary Ecology Research

Volumn 5, Issue 5, 2003, Pages 739-757

  Almeida, Catarina R ^a,b   Vistulo De Abreu, Fernão ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AVEIRO   (Portugal)

^b IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Complexity; Mating systems; Sexual competition; Sexual selection; Sympatric speciation

Indexed keywords

EID: 2342499757     PISSN: 15220613     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Albertson, R.C., Markert, J.A., Danley, P.D. and Kocher, T.D. 1999. Phylogeny of a rapidly evolving clade: the cichlid fishes of Lake Malawi, East Africa. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 96: 5107-5110.
2. Amundsen, T. and Forsgren, E. 2001. Male mate choice selects for female coloration in a fish. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 98: 13155-13160.
3. Andersson, M. 1994. Sexual Selection. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
4. Boughmann, J.W. 2001. Divergent sexual selection enhances reproductive isolation in sticklebacks. Nature, 411: 944-948.
5. Burley, N., Krantzberg, G. and Raduran, P. 1982. Influence of colour-banding on the conspecific preferences of zebra finches. Anim. Behav., 27: 686-698.
6. Bush, G.L. 1969. Sympatric host race formation and speciation in frugivorous flies of the genus Rhagoletis (Diptera, Tephritidae). Evolution, 23: 237-251.
7. Catry, P., Ratcliffe, N. and Furness, R.W. 1997. Partnerships and mechanisms of divorce in the great skua. Anim. Behav., 54: 1475-1482.
8. Doebeli, M. and Dieckmann, U. 2000. Evolutionary branching and sympatric speciation caused by different types of ecological interactions. Am. Nat., 156: S77-S101.
9. Ens, B.J., Safriel, U.N. and Harris, M.P. 1993. Divorce in the long-lived and monogamous oystercatcher, Haematopus ostralegus: incompatibility or choosing the better option? Anim. Behav., 45: 1199-1217.
10. Feijó, J.A., Sainhas, J., Holdaway-Clarke, T., Cordeiro, M.S., Kunkel, J.G. and Hepler, P.K. 2001. Cellular oscillations and the regulation of growth: the pollen tube paradigm. Bioessays, 23: 86-94.
11. Felsenstein, J. 1981. Skepticism towards Santa Rosalia, or why are there so few kinds of animals? Evolution, 35: 124-138.
12. Fordyce, J.A., Nice, C.C., Forister, M.L. and Shapiro, A.M. 2002. The significance of wing pattern diversity in the Lycaenidae: mate discrimination by two recently diverged species. J. Evol. Biol., 15: 871-879.
13. Futuyma, D.J. 1998. Evolutionary Biology, 3rd edn. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.
14. Gale, D. and Shapley, L.S. 1962. College admission and the stability of marriage. Am. Math. Monthly, 69: 9-14.
15. Gavrilets, S. 2000. Rapid evolution of reproductive barriers driven by sexual conflict. Nature, 403: 886-889.
16. Gowaty, P.A., Steinichen, R. and Anderson, W.W. 2002. Mutual interest between the sexes and reproductive success in Drosophila pseudoobscura. Evolution, 56: 2537-2540.
17. Grafe, T.U. 1997. Costs and benefits of mate choice in the lek-breeding reed frog, Hyperolius marmoratus. Anim. Behav., 53: 1103-1117.
18. Hayes, B. 1997. Can't get no satisfaction. Am. Sci., 85: 108-112.
19. Higashi, M., Takimoto, G. and Yamamura, N. 1999. Sympatric speciation by sexual selection. Nature, 402: 523-526.
20. Hormaza, J.I. and Herrero, M. 1994. Gametophytic competition and selection. In Genetic Control of Self-incompatibility and Reproductive Development in Flowering Plants (E.G. Williams, A.E. Clarke and R.B. Knox, eds), pp. 372-400. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
21. Jackson, C.L. and Hartwell, L.H. 1990. Courtship in S. cerevisae: both cell types choose mating partners by responding to the strongest pheromone signal. Cell, 63: 1039-1051.
22. Jeong, H., Tombor, B., Albert, R., Oltvai, Z.N. and Barabási, A.-L. 2000. The large-scale organization of metabolic networks. Nature, 407: 651-654.
23. Jones, I.L. and Hunter, F.M. 1993. Mutual sexual selection in a monogamous seabird. Nature, 362: 238-239.
24. Katvala, M. and Kaitala, A. 2001. Male choice for current female fecundity in a polyandrous egg-carrying bug. Anim. Behav., 61: 133-137.
25. Klips, R.A. 1999. Pollen competition as a reproductive isolating mechanism between two sympatric Hibiscus species (Malvaceae). Am. J. Bot., 86: 269-272.
26. Kondrashov, A.S. and Kondrashov, F.A. 1999. Interactions among quantitative traits in the course of sympatric speciation. Nature, 400: 351-354.
27. Lande, R. 1982. Rapid origin of sexual isolation and character divergence in a cline. Evolution, 36: 213-223.
28. Lande, R., Seehausen, O. and van Alphen, J.J.M. 2001. Mechanisms of rapid sympatric speciation by sex reversal and sexual selection in cichlid fish. Genetica, 112: 435-443.
29. Lankinen, A. and Skogsmyr, I. 2002. Pollen competitive ability: the effect of proportion in two-donor crosses. Evol. Ecol. Res., 4: 687-700.
30. Maynard Smith, J. 1966. Sympatric speciation. Am. Nat., 916: 637-650.
31. Mayr, E. 1963. Animal Species and Evolution. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
32. Miller, R.L., Mojares, J.J. and Ram J.L. 1994. Species-specific sperm attraction in the zebra mussel, Dreissena polymorpha, and the quagga mussel, Dreissena bugensis. Can. J. Zool., 72: 1764-1770.
33. Niesenbaum, R.A. and Schueller, S.K. 1997. Effects of pollen competitive environment on pollen performance in Mirabilis japala (Nyctaginaceae). Sex. Plant Repro., 10: 101-106.
34. Omero, M.J., Dzierzawa, M., Marsili, M. and Zhang, Y.-C. 1997. Scaling behavior in the stable marriage problem. J. Phys. I France, 7: 1723-1729.
35. Panhuis, T.M., Butlin, R., Zuk, M. and Tregenza, T. 2001. Sexual selection and speciation. Trends Ecol. Evol., 16: 364-371.
36. Parker, G.A. and Partridge, L. 1998. Sexual conflict and speciation. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B, 353: 261-274.
37. Rice, W.R. and Hostert, E.E. 1993. Perspective: laboratory experiments on speciation: what have we learned in forty years? Evolution, 47: 1637-1653.
38. Romero-Pujante, M., Hoi, H., Blomqvist, D. and Valera, F. 2002. Tail length and mutual mate choice in bearded tits (Panarus biarmicus). Ethology, 108: 885-895.
39. Rutherford, S.L. and Lindquist, S. 1998. Hsp90 as a capacitor for morphological evolution. Nature, 396: 336-342.
40. Rutowski, D.L. 1982. Epigamic selection by males as evidenced by courtship partner preferences in the checkered white butterfly (Pieris protodice). Anim. Behav., 30: 108-112.
41. Schliewen, U.K., Tautz, D. and Paabo, S. 1994. Sympatric speciation suggested by monophyly of crater lake cichlids. Nature, 368: 629-632.
42. Seehausen, O., van Alphen, J.J.M. and Lande, R. 1999. Color polymorphism and sex ratio distortion in a cichlid fish as an incipient stage in sympatric speciation by sexual selection. Ecol. Lett., 2: 367-378.
43. Streif, M. and Rasa, O.A.E. 2001. Divorce and its consequences in the Common Blackbird Turdus merula. Ibis, 143: 554-560.
44. Takimoto, G., Higashi, M. and Yamamura, N. 2000. A deterministic genetic model for sympatric speciation by sexual selection. Evolution, 54: 1870-1881.
45. Triefenbach, F. and Itzkowitz, M. 1998. Mate switching as a function of mate quality in convict cichlids, Cichlasoma nigrofasciatum. Anim. Behav., 55: 1263-1270.
46. Turelli, M., Barton, N.H. and Coyne, J.A. 2001. Theory and speciation. Trends Ecol. Evol., 16: 330-343.
47. Turner, G.F. and Burrows, M.T. 1995. A model of sympatric speciation by sexual selection. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, 260: 287-292.
48. van Doorn, G.S. and Weissing, F.J. 2001. Ecological versus sexual selection models of sympatric speciation. Selection, 2: 17-40.
49. van Doorn, G.S., Noest, A.J. and Hogeweg, P. 1998. Sympatric speciation and extinction driven by environment dependent sexual selection Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, 265: 1915-1919.
50. Wilhelmi, L.K. and Preuss, D. 1996. Self-sterility in Arabidopsis due to defective pollen tube guidance. Science, 274: 1535-1537.
51. White, J.M. and Rose, M.D. 2001. Yeast mating: getting close to membrane merger. Curr. Biol., 11: R16-R20.