The limits on sexual dimorphism in vegetative traits in a gynodioecious plant

American Naturalist

Volumn 166, Issue 4 SUPPL., 2005, Pages

  Ashman, Tia Lynn ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

^b Pymatuning Laboratory of Ecology   (United States)

Author keywords

Adaptive evolution; Antagonistic covariation; Dioecy; Fragaria virginiana; G matrix; Natural selection

Indexed keywords

DIOECY; NATURAL SELECTION; PHENOLOGY; REPRODUCTIVE STRATEGY; SEXUAL DIMORPHISM;

CONFERENCE PAPER; EVOLUTION; GENETIC SELECTION; GENETIC VARIABILITY; HISTOLOGY; METABOLISM; PHYSIOLOGY; PLANT; SEXUAL DEVELOPMENT; STRAWBERRY;

BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION; EVOLUTION; FRAGARIA; GENETIC VARIATION; PLANTS; SELECTION (GENETICS); SELECTION, GENETIC; SEX CHARACTERISTICS; VARIATION (GENETICS);

FRAGARIA VIRGINIANA; FRAGARIA X ANANASSA;

EID: 26644435984     PISSN: 00030147     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1086/444598     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (56)

1. Ahmadi, H., and R. S. Bringhurst. 1989. Genetics of sex expression in Fragaria species. American Journal of Botany 78:504-514.
2. Alonso, C., and C. M. Herrera. 2001. Neither vegetative nor reproductive advantages account for high frequency of male-steriles in southern Spanish gynodioecious Daphne laureola (Thymelaeaceae). American Journal of Botany 88:1016-1024.
3. Ashman, T.-L. 1999. Determinants of sex allocation in a gynodioecious wild strawberry: implications for the evolution of dioecy and sexual dimorphism. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 12:648-661.
4. _. 2003. Constraints on the evolution of dioecy and sexual dimorphism: field estimates of quantitative genetic parameters for reproductive traits in three populations of gynodioecious Fragaria virginiana. Evolution 57:2012-2025.
5. Ashman, T.-L., and C. Diefenderfer. 2001. Sex ratio represents a unique context for selection on attractive traits: consequences for the evolution of sexual dimorphism. American Naturalist 157:334-347.
6. Bégin, M., and D. A. Roff. 2001. An analysis of G matrix variation in two closely related cricket species, Gryllus firmus and G. pennsylvanicus. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 14:1-13.
7. Bond, W. J., and K. E. Maze. 1999. Survival costs and reproductive benefits of floral display in a sexually dimorphic dioecious shrub, Leucadendron xanthoconus. Evolutionary Ecology 13:1-18.
8. Bond, W. J., and J. Midgley. 1988. Allometry and sexual differences in leaf size. American Naturalist 131:901-910.
9. Campbell, D. R. 1991. Effects of floral traits on sequential components of fitness in Ipomopsis aggregata. American Naturalist 137:713-737.
10. _. 1996. Evolution of floral traits in a hermaphroditic plant: field measurements of heritabilities and genetic correlations. Evolution 50:1442-1453.
11. Caruso, C. M. 2004. The quantitative genetics of floral trait variation in Lobelia: potential constraints on adaptive evolution. Evolution 58:732-740.
12. Caruso, C. M., H. Maherali, and R. B. Jackson. 2003. Gender-specific floral and physiological traits: implications for the maintenance of females in gynodioecious Lobelia siphilitica. Oecologia (Berlin) 135:524-531.
13. Case, A. L., and T.-L. Ashman. 2005. Gender dimorphism: implications for reproductive cost and gender-specific physiology. Pages 126-154 in E. Reekie and F. Bazzaz, eds. The allocation of resources to reproduction in plants. Elsevier, New York.
14. Cipollini, M. L., and D. F. Whigham. 1994. Sexual dimorphism and cost of reproduction in the dioecious shrub Lindera benzoin (Lauraceae). American Journal of Botany 81:65-75.
15. Conner, J., and S. Via. 1992. Natural selection on body size in TH-bolium: possible genetic constraints on adaptive evolution. Heredity 69:73-83.
16. Costich, D. E., and T. R. Meagher. 2001. Impacts of floral gender and whole-plant gender on floral evolution in Ecballium elatrium (Cucurbitaceae). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 74:475-487.
17. Dawson, T. E., and M. A. Geber. 1999. Sexual dimorphism in physiology and morphology. Pages 175-215 in M. A. Geber, T. E. Dawson, and L. F. Delph, eds. Gender and sexual dimorphism in flowering plants. Springer, Berlin.
18. Delph, L. F. 1999. Sexual dimorphism in life history. Pages 149-174 in M. A. Geber, T. E. Dawson, and L. F. Delph, eds. Gender and sexual dimorphism in flowering plants. Springer, Berlin.
19. Delph, L. F., F. M. Frey, J. C. Steven, and J. L. Gehring. 2004. Investigating the independent evolution of the size of floral organs via G-matrix estimation and artificial selection. Evolution and Development 6: 438-448.
20. Dzhaparidze, L. I. 1967. Sex in plants. I. Israel Program for Scientific Translations, Jerusalem.
21. Eckhart, V. M. 1999. Sexual dimorphism in flowers and inflorescences. Pages 123-148 in M. A. Geber, T. E. Dawson, and L. F. Delph, eds. Gender and sexual dimorphism in flowering plants. Springer, Berlin.
22. Eckhart, V. M., and F. S. I. Chapin. 1997. Nutrient sensitivity of the cost of male function in gynodioecious Phacelia linearis (Hydrophyllaceae). American Journal of Botany 84:1092-1098.
23. Elle, E., and T. R. Meagher. 2000. Sex allocation and reproductive success in the andromonecious perennial Solanum carolinense (Solanaceae). II. Paternity and functional gender. American Naturalist 156:622-636.
24. Etterson, J. R., and R. G. Shaw. 2001. Constraint to adaptive evolution in response to global warming. Science 294:151-154.
25. Geber, M. A. 1999. Theories of the evolution of sexual dimorphism. Pages 97-122 in M. A. Geber, T. E. Dawson, and L. F. Delph, eds. Gender and sexual dimorphism in flowering plants. Springer, Berlin.
26. Geber, M. A., and L. R. Griffen. 2003. Inheritance and natural selection on functional traits. International Journal of Plant Sciences 164(suppl.):S21-S42.
27. Gómez, J. M. 2004. Bigger is not always better: conflicting selective pressures on seed size in Quercus ilex. Evolution 58:71-80.
28. Hancock, J. F., Jr., and R. S. Bringhurst. 1980. Sexual dimorphism in the strawberry Fragaria chiloensis. Evolution 34:762-768.
29. Kohn, J. R. 1989. Sex ratio, seed production, biomass allocation, and the cost of male function in Cucurbita foetidissima HBK (Cucurbitaceae). Evolution 43:1424-1434.
30. Kohorn, L. U. 1994. Shoot morphology and reproduction in jojoba: advantages of sexual dimorphism. Ecology 75:2384-2394.
31. _. 1995. Geographic variation in the occurrence and extent of sexual dimorphism in a dioecious shrub, Simmondsia chinensis. Oikos 74:137-145.
32. Korpelainen, H. 1992. Patterns of resource allocation in male and female plants of Rumex acetosa and Rumex acetosella. Oecologia (Berlin) 89:133-139.
33. Lande, R., and S. J. Arnold. 1983. The measurement of selection on correlated characters. Evolution 37:1210-1226.
34. Lovett Doust, J. L., and L. L. Lovett Doust. 1988. Modules of production and reproduction in a dioecious clonal shrub, Rhus typhina. Ecology 69:741-750.
35. Lovett Doust, J., G. O'Brien, and L. Lovett Doust. 1987. Effect of density on secondary sex characteristics and sex ratio in Silene alba (Caryophyllaceae). American Journal of Botany 74:40-46.
36. Lynch, M., and B. Walsh. 1998. Genetics and analysis of quantitative traits. Sinauer, Sunderland, MA.
37. Lyons, E. E., D. Miller, and T. R. Meagher. 1994. Evolutionary dynamics of sex ratio and gender dimorphism in Silene latifolia. I. Environmental effects. Journal of Heredity 85:196-203.
38. Machon, N., V. D. Le Boulc'h, and C. Rameau. 1995. Quantitative analysis of sexual dimorphism in Asparagus. Canadian Journal of Botany 73:1780-1786.
39. Meagher, T. R. 1992. The quantitative genetics of sexual dimorphism in Silene latifolia (Caryophyllaceae). I. Genetic variation. Evolution 46:445-457.
40. _. 1999. The quantitative genetics of sexual dimorphism. Pages 275-290 in M. A. Geber, T. E. Dawson, and L. F. Delph, eds. Gender and sexual dimorphism in flowering plants. Springer, Berlin.
41. Mitchell, J. R., R. G. Shaw, and N. M. Waser. 1998. Pollinator selection, quantitative genetics and predicted evolutionary responses of floral traits in Penstemon centranthifolius (Scrophulariaceae). International Journal of Plant Sciences 159:331-337.
42. Morgan, M. T. 1992. The evolution of traits influencing male and female fertility in outcrossing plants. American Naturalist 139:1022-1051.
43. Morgan, M. T., and T.-L. Ashman. 2003. Quantitative character evolution under complicated sexual systems, illustrated in gynodioecious Fragaria virginiana. American Naturalist 162:257-264.
44. Nicotra, A. B. 1999. Sexually dimorphic growth in the dioecious tropical shrub, Siparuna grandiflora. Functional Ecology 13:322-331.
45. Olff, H., D. Kuiper, J. M. M. Van Damme, and P. J. C. Kuiper. 1989. Gynodioecy in Plantago laneolata. VI. Functions of cytokinins in growth, development and reproduction of two sex types. Canadian Journal of Botany 67:2765-2769.
46. Poot, P. 1997. Reproductive allocation and resource compensation in male-sterile and hermaphroditic plants of Plantago lanceolata (Plantaginaceae). American Journal of Botany 84:1256-1265.
47. Ramsey, M., and G. Vaughton. 2001. Sex expression and sexual dimorphism in subdioecious Wurmbea dioica (Colchicaceae). International Journal of Plant Sciences 162:589-597.
48. _. 2002. Maintenance of gynodioecy in Wurmbea biglandulosa (Cholicaceae): gender differences in seed production and progeny success. Plant Systematics and Evolution 232:189-200.
49. Reeve, J. P., and D. J. Fairbairn. 1999. Change in sexual size dimorphism as a correlated response to selection on fecundity. Heredity 83:697-706.
50. Roff, D. A. 1997. Evolutionary quantitative genetics. Chapman & Hall, New York.
51. Sakai, A. K., and T. A. Burris. 1985. Growth in male and female aspen (Populus tremuloides) clones: a twenty-five-year longitudinal study. Ecology 66:1921-1927.
52. Sakai, A. K., and T. L. Sharik. 1988. Clonal growth of male and female bigtooth aspen Populus grandidentata. Ecology 69:2031-2033.
53. Shykoff, J. A., S.-O. Kolokotronis, C. L. Collin, and M. López-Villavicencio. 2003. Effects of male sterility on reproductive traits in gynodioecious plants: a meta-analysis. Oecologia (Berlin) 135:1-9.
54. Staudt, G. 1989. The species of Fragaria, their taxonomic and geographical distribution. Acta Horticulturae 265:23-33.
55. Steppan, S. J., P. C. Phillips, and D. Houle. 2002. Comparative quantitative genetics: evolution of the G matrix. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 17:320-327.
56. Worley, A. C., and S. C. H. Barrett. 2000. Evolution of floral display in Eichornia paniculata (Pontederiaceae): direct and correlated responses to selection on flower size and number. Evolution 54:1533-1545.