Sexual selection and the detection of ecological speciation

Evolutionary Ecology Research

Volumn 8, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 399-413

  Schwartz, Amy K ^a   Hendry, Andrew P ^a  

^a MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Divergent natural selection; Local adaptation; Mate choice; Parallel evolution; Pre mating isolation; Preference function

Indexed keywords

EID: 33645768932     PISSN: 15220613     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Arnold, S.J., Verrell, P.E. and Tilley, S.G. 1996. The evolution of asymmetry in sexual isolation: a model and a test case. Evolution, 50: 1024-1033.
2. Blows, M.W., Brooks, R. and Kraft, P.G. 2003. Exploring complex fitness surfaces: multiple ornamentation and polymorphism in male guppies. Evolution, 57: 1622-1630.
3. Bordentstein, S.R., Drapeau, M.D. and Werren, J.H. 2000. Intraspecific variation in sexual isolation in the jewel wasp Nasonia. Evolution, 54: 567-573.
4. Boughman, J.W. 2001. Divergent sexual selection enhances reproductive isolation in sticklebacks. Nature, 411: 944-948.
5. Boughman, J.W., Rundle, H.D. and Schluter, D. 2005. Parallel evolution of sexual isolation in stickleback. Evolution, 59: 361-373.
6. Brodie, E.D., Moore, A.J. and Janzen, F.J. 1995. Visualizing and quantifying natural selection. Trends Ecol. Evol., 10: 313-318.
7. Brooks, R. and Endler, J.A. 2001. Female guppies agree to differ: phenotypic and genetic variation in mate-choice behavior and the consequences for sexual selection. Evolution, 55: 1644-1655.
8. Coyne, J.A. and Orr, H.A. 2004. Speciation. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.
9. Dagley, J.R., Butlin, R.K. and Hewitt, G.M. 1994. Divergence in morphology and mating signals, and assortative mating among populations of Chorthippus parallelus. Evolution, 48: 1202-1210.
10. Ellers, J. and Boggs, C.L. 2002. The evolution of wing color in Colias butterlies: heritability, sex linkage, and population divergence. Evolution, 56: 836-840.
11. Ellers, J. and Boggs, C.L. 2003. The evolution of wing color: male mate choice opposes adaptive wing color divergence in Colias butterflies. Evolution, 57: 1100-1106.
12. Endler, J.A. 1980. Natural selection on color patterns in Poecilia reticulata. Evolution, 34: 76-91.
13. Endler, J.A. 1992. Signals, signal conditions, and the direction of evolution. Am. Nat., 139: S125-S153.
14. Etges, W.J. 2002. Divergence in mate choice systems: does evolution play by rules? Genetica, 116: 151-166.
15. Etges, W.J. and Ahrens, M.A. 2001. Premating isolation is determined by larval-rearing substrates in cactophilic Drosophila mojavensis. V. Deep geographical variation in epicuticular hydrocarbons among isolated populations. Am. Nat., 158: 585-598.
16. Felsenstein, J. 1981. Skepticism towards Santa Rosalia, or why are there so few kinds of animals? Evolution, 35: 124-138.
17. Fisher, R.A. 1930. The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection. New York: Dover.
18. Fraser, I. and Boake, C.R.B. 1997. Behavioral isolation, test designs, and Kaneshiro's hypothesis. Am. Nat., 149: 527-539.
19. Fuller, R.C., Houle, D. and Travis, J. 2005. Sensory bias as an explanation for the evolution of mate preferences. Am. Nat., 166: 437-447.
20. Funk, D.J. 1998. Isolating a role for natural selection in speciation: host adaptation and sexual isolation in Neochlamisus bebbianae leaf beetles. Evolution, 52: 1744-1759.
21. Gilburn, A.S. and Day, T.H. 1994. Evolution of female choice in seaweed flies - Fisherian and good genes mechanisms operate in different populations. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, 255: 159-165.
22. Grafe, T.U. 1997. Costs and benefits of mate choice in the lek-breeding reed frog, Hyperolius marmoratus. Anim. Behav., 53: 1103-1117.
23. Hendry, A.P. 2004. Selection against migrants contributes to the rapid evolution of ecologically dependent reproductive isolation. Evol. Ecol. Res., 6: 1219-1236.
24. Houde, A.E. and Endler, J.A. 1990. Correlated evolution of female mating preferences and male color patterns in the guppy Poecilia reticulata. Science, 428: 1405-1408.
25. Kaneshiro, K.Y. 1980. Sexual isolation, speciation and the direction of evolution. Evolution, 34: 437-444.
26. Kime, N.M., Rand, A.S., Kapfer, M. and Ryan, M.J. 1998. Consistency of female choice in the tungara frog: a permissive preference for complex characters. Anim. Behav., 55: 641-649.
27. Kime, N.M., Burmeister, S.S. and Ryan, M.J. 2004. Female preferences for socially variable call characters in the cricket frog, Acris crepitans. Anim. Behav., 68: 1391-1399.
28. Kinnison, M.T. and Hendry, A.P. 2001. The pace of modern life II: From rates of contemporary microevolution to pattern and process. Genetica, 112/113: 145-164.
29. Kirkpatrick, M. and Ravigné. V. 2002. Speciation by natural and sexual selection: models and experiments. Am. Nat., 159: S22-S35.
30. Kokko, H. 2003. The evolution of mate choice and mating biases. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, 270: 653-664.
31. Korol, A., Rashkovetsky, E., Iliadi, K., Michalak, P., Ronin, Y. and Nevo, E. 2000. Non-random mating in Drosophila melanogaster laboratory populations derived from closely adjacent ecologically contrasting slopes at 'Evolution Canyon'. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 97: 12637-12642.
32. Kwiatkowski, M.A. and Sullivan, B.K. 2002. Geographic variation in sexual selection among populations of an iguanid lizard, Sauromalus obesus ( = ater). Evolution, 56: 2039-2051.
33. Lande, R. 1981. Models of speciation by sexual selection on polygenic traits. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, 78: 3721-3725.
34. Lande, R. 1982. Rapid origin of sexual isolation and character divergence in a cline. Evolution, 36: 213-223.
35. Liou, L.W. and Price, T.D. 1994. Speciation by reinforcement of premating isolation. Evolution, 48: 1451-1459.
36. Mayr, E. 1963. Animal Species and Evolution. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.
37. McKinnon, J.S., Mori, S., Blackman, B.K., David, L., Kingsley, D.M., Jamieson, L. et al. 2004. Evidence for ecology's role in speciation. Nature, 429: 294-298.
38. McPeek, M.A. and Wellborn, G.A. 1998. Genetic variation and reproductive isolation among phenotypically divergent amphipod populations. Limnol. Oceanogr., 43: 1162-1169.
39. Miller, G.L., Stratton, G.E., Miller, P.R. and Hebets, E. 1998. Geographical variation in male courtship behaviour and sexual isolation in wolf spiders of the genus Schizocosa. Anim. Behav., 56: 937-951.
40. Nagel, L. and Schluter, D. 1998. Body size, natural selection, and speciation in sticklebacks. Evolution, 52: 209-218.
41. Nosil, P. 2004. Reproductive isolation caused by visual predation on migrants between divergent environments. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, 271: 1521-1528.
42. Nosil, P., Crespi, B.J. and Sandoval, C.P. 2002. Host-plant adaptation drives the parallel evolution of reproductive isolation. Nature, 417: 440-443.
43. Ritchie, M.G. 1996. The shape of female mating preferences. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 93: 14628-14631.
44. Rolan-Alvarez, E. and Caballero, M. 2000. Estimating sexual selection and sexual isolation from mating frequencies. Evolution, 54: 30-36.
45. Rundle, H.D. and Nosil, P. 2005. Ecological speciation. Ecol. Lett., 8: 336-352.
46. Rundle, H.D., Nagel, L., Boughman, J.W. and Schluter D. 2000. Natural selection and parallel speciation in sympatric sticklebacks. Science, 287: 306-308.
47. Ryan, M.J. and Keddy-Hector, A. 1992. Directional patterns of female mate choice and the role of sensory biases. Am. Nat., 139: S4-S35.
48. Ryan, M.J. and Rand, A.S. 1990. The sensory basis of sexual selection for complex calls in the tungara frog, Physalaemus pustulosus (sexual selection for sensory exploitation). Evolution, 44: 305-314.
49. Ryan, M.J. and Rand, A.S. 1993. Sexual selection and signal evolution - the ghosts of biases past. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B, 340: 187-195.
50. Ryan, M.J., Cocroft, R.B. and Wilczynski, W. 1990. The role of environmental selection in intra-specific divergence of mate recognition signals in the cricket frog. Acris crepitans. Evolution, 44: 1869-1872.
51. Schluter, D. 2000. The Ecology of Adaptive Radiation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
52. Schluter, D. 2001. Ecology and the origin of species. Trends Ecol. Evol., 16: 372-380.
53. Schluter, D. and Price, T. 1993. Honesty, perception and population divergence in sexually selected traits. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, 253: 117-122.
54. Seehausen, O. 1997. Distribution of and reproductive isolation among color morphs of a rock-dwelling Lake Victoria cichlid (Haplochromis nyererei). Ecol. Freshwat. Fish. 6: 57-65.
55. Seehausen, O. and Schluter, D. 2004. Male-male competition and nuptial-color displacement as a diversifying force in Lake Victoria cichlid fishes. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B. 271: 1345-1353.
56. Servedio, M.R. 2000. Reinforcement and the genetics of nonrandom mating. Evolution, 54: 21-29.
57. Simmons, L.W., Zuk, M. and Rotenberry, J.T. 2001. Geographic variation in female preference functions and male songs of the field cricket Teleogryllus oceanicus. Evolution, 55: 1386-1394.
58. Sisodia, S. and Singh, B.N. 2004. Size dependent sexual selection in Drosophila ananassae. Genetica, 121: 207-215.
59. Tregenza, T., Pritchard, V.L. and Butlin, R.K. 2000. The origins of premating reproductive isolation: testing hypotheses in the grasshopper Chorthippus parallelus. Evolution, 54: 1687-1698.
60. Van Doorn, G.S. and Weissing, F.J. 2004. The evolution of female preferences for multiple indicators of quality. Am. Nat., 164: 173-186.
61. Wagner, W.E. 1998. Measuring female mating preferences. Anim. Behav., 55: 1029-1042.
62. Widemo, F. and Saether, S.A. 1999. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder: causes and consequences of variation in mating preferences. Trends Ecol. Evol., 14: 26-31.
63. Zuk, M., Rotenberry, J.T. and Simmons, L.W. 2001. Geographical variation in calling song of the field cricket Teleogryllus oceanicus: the importance of spatial scale. Evolution, 55: 1386-1394.