Fitness consequences of female preference for male pheromones in Tenebrio molitor

Evolutionary Ecology Research

Volumn 8, Issue 5, 2006, Pages 943-957

  Vainikka, Anssi ^a,c   Seppälä, Otto ^a   Löytynoja, Katja ^a   Rantala, Markus J ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF JYVÄSKYLÄ   (Finland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TURKU   (Finland)

^c Institute of Coastal Research   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Fitness; Good genes; Handicap; Lifespan; Sexual conflict

Indexed keywords

COLEOPTERA; TENEBRIO; TENEBRIO MOLITOR;

EID: 33746575094     PISSN: 15220613     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Ahtiainen, J.J., Alatalo, R.V., Kortet, R. and Rantala, M.J. 2004. Sexual advertisement and immune function in an arachnid species (Lycosideae). Behav. Ecol., 15: 602-606.
2. Alatalo, R.V., Kotiaho, J., Mappes, J. and Parri, S. 1998. Mate choice for offspring performance: major benefits or minor costs? Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, 265: 2297-2301.
3. Andersson, M. 1986. Evolution of condition-dependent sex ornaments and mating preferences: sexual selection based on viability differences. Evolution, 40: 804-816.
4. Andersson, M. 1994. Sexual Selection. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
5. August, C.J. 1971. The role of male and female pheromones in the mating behaviour of Tenebrio molitor. J. Insect Physiol., 17: 739-751.
6. Barber, I., Arnott, S.A., Braithwaite, V.A., Andrew, J. and Huntingword, F.A. 2001. Indirect fitness consequences of mate choice in sticklebacks: offspring of brighter males grow slowly but resist parasitic infections. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, 268: 71-76.
7. Bhattacharya, A.K., Ameel, J.J. and Waldbaer, G.P. 1970. A method for sexing living pupal and adult yellow mealworms. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am., 63: 1783.
8. Boake, C.R.B. 1985. Genetic consequences of mate choice: a quantitative genetic method for testing sexual selection theory. Science, 227: 1061-1063.
9. Brooks, R. 2000. Negative genetic correlation between male sexual attractiveness and survival. Nature, 406: 67-70.
10. Carazo, P., Sanchez, C.P. and Desfilis, E. 2004. Chemosensory cues allow male Tenebrio molitor beetles to assess the reproductive status of potential mates. Anim. Behav., 68: 123-129.
11. Chapman, T. and Partridge, L. 1996. Sexual conflict as fuel for evolution. Nature, 381: 189-190.
12. Chapman, T., Arnqvist, G., Bangham, J. and Rowe, L. 2003. Sexual conflict. TREE, 18: 41-47.
13. Colegrave, N., Kotiaho, J.S. and Tomkins, J.L. 2002. Mate choice or polyandry: reconciling genetic compatibility and good genes sexual selection. Evol. Ecol. Res., 4: 911-917.
14. Cotter, S.C. and Wilson, K. 2002. Heritability of immune function in the caterpillar Spodoptera littoralis. Heredity, 88: 229-234.
15. Crudgington, H.S., Beckerman, A.P., Brüstle, L., Green, K. and Snook, R.R. 2005. Experimental removal and evolution of sexual selection: does sexual selection generate manipulative males and resistant females? Am. Nat., 165: S72-S87.
16. David, P., Bjorksten, T., Fowler, K. and Pomiankowski, A. 2000. Condition-dependent signaling of genetic variation in stalk-eyed flies. Nature, 406: 186-188.
17. Day, E. 1989. Darkling Beetle Factsheet. Blacksburg, VA: Virginia Cooperative Extension.
18. Ditchkoff, S.S., Lochmiller, R.L., Masters, R.E., Hoofer, S.R. and Van Den Bussche R.A. 2001. Major-histocompatibility-complex-associated variation in secondary sexual traits of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus): evidence for good-genes advertisement. Evolution, 55: 616-625.
19. Droney, D.C. 2003. Females lay fewer eggs for males with greater courtship success in a lekking Drosophila. Anim. Behav., 65: 371-378.
20. Eshel, I., Sansone, E. and Jacobs, F. 2002. A long-term genetic model for the evolution of sexual preference: the theories of Fisher and Zahavi re-examined. J. Math. Biol., 45: 1-21.
21. Fisher, R.A. 1930. The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
22. Folstad, I. and Karter, A.J. 1992. Parasites, bright males and the immunocompetence handicap. Am. Nat., 139: 603-622.
23. Hamilton, W.D. and Zuk, M. 1982. Heritable true fitness and bright birds: a role for parasites? Science, 218: 384-387.
24. Happ, G.M. 1969. Multiple sex pheromones of the mealworm beetle, Tenebrio molitor L. Nature, 222: 180-181.
25. Hunt, J., Simmons, L.W. and Kotiaho, J.S. 2002. A cost of maternal care in the dung beetle Onthophagus taurus? J. Evol. Biol., 15: 57-64.
26. Hurd, H. and Parry, G. 1991. Metacestode-induced depression of the production, and responses to, sex pheromone in the intermediate host Tenebrio molitor. J. Inverteb. Pathol., 58: 82-87.
27. Iwasa, Y. and Pomiankowski, A. 1999. Good parent and good genes models of handicap evolution. J. Theor. Biol., 200: 97-109.
28. Johnsen, A., Delhey, K., Andersson, S. and Kempenaers, B. 2003. Plumage colour in nestling blue tits: sexual dichromatism, condition dependence and genetic effects. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, 270: 1263-1270.
29. Johnstone, R.A. and Grafen, A. 1993. Dishonesty and the handicap principle. Anim. Behav., 46: 759-764.
30. Koivula, M., Koskela, E., Mappes, T. and Oksanen, T.A. 2003. Cost of reproduction in the wild: manipulation of reproductive effort in the bank vole. Ecology, 84: 398-405.
31. Kokko, H., Brooks, R., Jennions, M.D. and Morley, J. 2003. The evolution of mate choice and mating biases. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, 270: 653-664.
32. Kortet, R., Vainikka, A., Rantala, M.J., Myntti, J. and Taskinen, J. 2004. In vitro embryo survival and early viability of larvae in relation to male sexual ornaments and parasite resistance in roach, Rutilus rutilus L. J. Evol. Biol., 17: 1337-1344.
33. Møller, A.P. and Alatalo, R.V. 1999. Good-genes effects in sexual selection. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, 266: 85-91.
34. Moore, A.J., Gowaty, P.A. and Moore, P.J. 2003. Females avoid manipulative males and live longer. J. Evol. Biol., 16: 523-530.
35. Petrie, M. 1994. Improved growth and survival of offspring of peacocks with more elaborate traits. Nature, 371: 598-599.
36. Pomiankowski, A. 1987. Sexual selection: the handicap principle does work - sometimes. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. 5, 231: 123-145.
37. Rantala, M.J. and Kortet, R. 2003. Courtship song and immune function in the field cricket Gryllys bimaculatus. Biol. J. Linn. Soc., 79: 503-510.
38. Rantala, M.J., Koskimäki, J., Suhonen, J., Taskinen, J. and Tynkkynen, K. 2000. Immunocompetence, developmental stability and wing spot size in Calopteryx splendens. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, 267: 2453-2457.
39. Rantala, M.J., Jokinen, I., Kortet, R., Vainikka, A. and Suhonen, J. 2002. Do pheromones reveal male immunocompetence? Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, 269: 1681-1685.
40. Rantala, M.J., Kortet, R., Kotiaho, J.S., Vainikka, A. and Suhonen, J. 2003a. Condition dependence of pheromones and immune function in the grain beetle Tenebrio molitor. Funct. Ecol., 17: 534-540.
41. Rantala, M.J., Vainikka, A. and Kortet, R. 2003b. The role of juvenile hormone in immune function and pheromone production trade-offs: a test of the immunocompetence handicap principle. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, 270: 2257-2261.
42. Sarma, S.S.S., Nandini, S. and Gulati, R.D. 2002. Cost of reproduction in selected species of zooplankton (rotifers and gladocerans). Hydrobiologia, 481: 89-99.
43. Siva-Jothy, M.T. and Skarstein, F. 1998. Towards a functional understanding of 'good genes'. Ecol. Lett., 1: 178-185.
44. Tanaka, Y., Honda, H., Ohsawa, K. and Yamamoto, I. 1986. A sex attractant of the yellow mealworm, Tenebrio molitor L., and its role in the mating behaviour. J. Pest. Sci., 11: 49-55.
45. Watt, P.J., Shohet, A.J. and Renshaw, K. 2001. Female choice for good genes and sex-biased broods in guppies. J. Fish Biol., 59: 843-850.
46. Wedekind, C. 1994. Handicaps not obligatory in sexual selection for resistance genes. J. Theor. Biol., 170: 57-62.
47. Wedekind, C., Müller, R. and Spicher, H. 2001. Potential genetic benefits of mate selection in whitewish. J. Evol. Biol., 14: 980-986.
48. Worden, B.D. and Parker, P.G. 2001. Polyandry in grain beetles, Tenebrio molitor, leads to greater reproductive success: material or genetic benefits? Behav. Ecol., 12: 761-767.
49. Worden, B.D., Parker, P.G. and Pappas, P.W. 2000. Parasites reduce attractiveness and reproductive success in male grain beetles. Anim. Behav., 59: 543-550.
50. Zahavi, A. 1975. Mate selection - a selection for a handicap. J. Theor. Biol., 53: 205-214.