Proximate causes of Rensch's rule: Does sexual size dimorphism in arthropods result from sex differences in development time?

American Naturalist

Volumn 169, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 245-257

  Blanckenhorn, Wolf U ^a   Dixon, Anthony F G ^b   Fairbairn, Daphne J ^c   Foellmer, Matthias W ^d   Gibert, Patricia ^e   Van Der Linde, Kim ^f,l   Meier, Rudolf ^g,h   Nylin, Sören ⁱ   Pitnick, Scott ^j   Schoff, Christopher ^j   Signorelli, Martino ^a   Teder, Tiit ^k   Wiklund, Christer ⁱ  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EAST ANGLIA   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^d SAINT MARY S UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^e UNIVERSITÉ LYON 1   (France)

^f LEIDEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^g UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

^h NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE   (Singapore)

ⁱ STOCKHOLM UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^j SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^k UNIVERSITY OF TARTU   (Estonia)

^l FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

more..

Author keywords

Allometry; Body size; Development time; Gonads; Growth; Rensch's rule; Sexual selection; Sexual size dimorphism

Indexed keywords

ALLOMETRY; ARTHROPOD; BODY SIZE; DEVELOPMENTAL BIOLOGY; GROWTH RATE; LIFE HISTORY TRAIT; REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY; SEX ALLOCATION; SEX-RELATED DIFFERENCE; SEXUAL DIMORPHISM; SEXUAL MATURITY; SEXUAL SELECTION;

ANIMAL; ARTHROPOD; ARTICLE; BODY SIZE; EVOLUTION; FEMALE; GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT AND AGING; MALE; SEX DIFFERENCE; SEXUAL DEVELOPMENT; SEXUAL SELECTION;

ANIMALS; ARTHROPODS; BODY SIZE; EVOLUTION; FEMALE; MALE; MATING PREFERENCE, ANIMAL; SEX CHARACTERISTICS; SEX FACTORS;

ARANEAE; ARTHROPODA; AVES; COLEOPTERA; DROSOPHILIDAE; GERRIDAE; HYMENOPTERA; PAPILIONOIDEA; PRIMATES; SEPSIDAE;

EID: 33846626416     PISSN: 00030147     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1086/510597     Document Type: Article

References (95)

1. Abouheif, E., and D. J. Fairbairn. 1997. A comparative analysis of allometry for sexual size dimorphism: assessing Rensch's rule. American Naturalist 149:540-562.
2. Abrams, P. A., O. Leimar, S. Nylin, and C. Wiklund. 1996. The effect of flexible growth rates on optimal sizes and development times in a seasonal environment. American Naturalist 147:381-395.
3. Alcock, J. 1997. Small males emerge earlier than large males in Dawson's burrowing bee (Amegilla dawsoni) (Hymenoptera: Anthophorini). Journal of Zoology 242:453-462.
4. Andersen, N. M. 1994. The evolution of sexual size dimorphism and mating systems in water striders (Hemiptera: Gerridae): a phylogenetic approach. Ecoscience 1:208-214.
5. -. 1997. A phylogenetic analysis of the evolution of sexual dimorphism and mating systems in water striders (Hemiptera: Gerridae). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 61:345-368.
6. Andersson, M. 1994. Sexual selection. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
7. Arak, A. 1988. Sexual dimorphism in body size: a model and a test. Evolution 42:820-825.
8. Arnedo, M. A., J. Coddington, I. Agnarsson, and R. G. Gillespie. 2004. From a comb to a tree: phylogenetic relationships of the comb-footed spiders (Araneae, Theridiidae) inferred from nuclear and mitochondrial genes. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 31:225-245.
9. Badyaev, A. V. 2002. Growing apart: an ontogenetic perspective on the evolution of sexual size dimorphism. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 17:369-378.
10. Badyaev, A. V., L. A. Whittingham, and G. E. Hill. 2001a. The evolution of sexual dimorphism in the house finch. III. Developmental basis. Evolution 55:176-189.
11. Badyaev, A. V., G. E. Hill, and L. A. Whittingham. 2001b. The evolution of sexual dimorphism in the house finch. IV. Population divergence in ontogeny. Evolution 55:2534-2549.
12. Baker, R. H., and G. S. Wilkinson. 2001. Phylogenetic analysis of sexual dimorphism and eye-span allometry in stalk-eyed flies (Diopsidae). Evolution 55:1373-1385.
13. Blanckenhorn, W. U. 1998. Adaptive phenotypic plasticity in growth, development and body size in the yellow dung fly. Evolution 52: 1394-1407.
14. -. 2000. The evolution of body size: what keeps organisms small? Quarterly Review of Biology 75:385-407.
15. Blanckenhorn, W. U., and M. Demont. 2004. Bergmann and converse Bergmann latitudinal clines in arthropods: two ends of a continuum? Integrative and Comparative Biology 44:413-424.
16. Blanckenhorn, W. U., and D. Perner. 1996. Life history dependent behavioural variation in water striders, Aquarius remigis. Ethology 102:993-1007.
17. Cabana, G., A. Frewin, R. H. Peters, and L. Randall. 1982. The effect of sexual size dimorphism on variations in reproductive effort of birds and mammals. American Naturalist 120:17-25.
18. Coddington, J. A., and H. W. Levi. 1991. Systematics and evolution of spiders (Araneae). Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 22:565-592.
19. Damgaard, J., N. M. Andersen, and F. A. Sperling. 2000. Phylogeny of the water strider genus Aquarius Schellenberg (Heteroptera: Gerridae) based on nuclear and mitochondrial DNA sequences and morphology. Insect Systematics and Evolution 31:71-90.
20. Darwin, C. 1871. The descent of man and selection in relation to sex. J. Murray, London.
21. Dixon, A. F. G. 2000. Insect predator-prey dynamics: ladybird beetles and biological control. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
22. Eberhard, W. G., B. A. Huber, R. L. Rodriguez, R. D. Briceno, I. Salas, and V. Rodriquez. 1998. One size fits all? relationships between the size and degree of variation in genitalia and other body parts in twenty species of insects and spiders. Evolution 52:415-431.
23. Fagerström, T., and C. Wiklund. 1982. Why do males emerge before females? protandry as a mating strategy in male and female butterflies. Oecologia (Berlin) 52:164-166.
24. Fairbairn, D. J. 1990. Factors influencing sexual size dimorphism in temperate waterstriders. American Naturalist 136:61-86.
25. -. 1997. Allometry for sexual size dimorphism: pattern and process in the coevolution of body size in males and females. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 28:659-687.
26. Fairbairn, D. J., and R. F. Preziosi. 1994. Sexual selection and the evolution of allometry for sexual size dimorphism in the water strider, Aquarius remigis. American Naturalist 144:101-118.
27. Gotthard, K. 2000. Increased risk of predation as a cost of high growth rate: an experimental test in a butterfly. Journal of Animal Ecology 69:896-902.
28. Gotthard, K., and S. Nylin. 1995. Adaptive plasticity and plasticity as an adaptation: a selective review of plasticity in animal morphology and life history. Oikos 74:3-17.
29. Gotthard, K., S. Nylin, and C. Wiklund. 1994. Adaptive variation in growth rate: life history costs and consequences in the speckled butterfly. Oecologia (Berlin) 99:281-289.
30. Gould, S. J. 1966. Allometry and size in ontogeny and phylogeny. Biological Reviews 41:587-640.
31. Griswold, C. E., J. A. Coddington, N. I. Platnick, and R. R. Forster. 1999. Towards a phylogeny of entelegyne spiders (Araneae, Araneomorphae, Entelegynae). Journal of Arachnology 27:53-63.
32. Harvey, J. A., and M. R. Strand. 2003. Sexual size and development time dimorphism in a parasitoid wasp: an exception to the rule. European Journal of Entomology 100:485-492.
33. Head, G. 1995. Selection on fecundity and variation in the degree of sexual size dimorphism among spider species (class Araneae). Evolution 49:776-781.
34. Hedrick, A. V., and E. J. Temeles. 1989. The evolution of sexual dimorphism in animals: hypotheses and tests. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 4:136-138.
35. Honek, A. 1993. Intraspecific variation in body size and fecundity in insects: a general relationship. Oikos 66:483-492.
36. Hormiga, G., N. Scharff, and J. A. Coddington. 2000. The phylogenetic basis of sexual size dimorphism in orb-weaving spiders (Araneae, Orbiculariae). Systematic Biology 49:435-462.
37. Huber, B. A. 2005. Sexual selection research on spiders: progress and biases. Biological Reviews 80:363-385.
38. Huey, R. B., B. Moreteau, J. C. Moreteau, P. Gibert, G. W. Gilchrist, A. R. Ives, T. Garland, and J. R. David. 2006. Sexual size dimorphism in a Drosophila clade, the D. obscura group. Zoology 109: 318-330.
39. Jannot, J. E., and B. L. Kerans. 2003. Body size, sexual size dimorphism, and Rensch's rule in adult hydropsychid caddisflies (Trichoptera: Hydropsychidae). Canadian Journal of Zoology 81:1956-1964.
40. Jarosík, V., and A. Honek. 2007. Sexual differences in insect development time in relation to sexual size dimorphism. In D. J. Fairbairn, W. U. Blanckenhorn, and T. Szekely, eds. Sex, size and gender roles: evolutionary studies of sexual size dimorphism. Oxford University Press, Oxford (forthcoming).
41. Johansson, F., P. H. Crowley, and T. Brodin. 2005. Sexual size dimorphism and sex ratios in dragonflies (Odonata). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 86:507-513.
42. Kawaguchi, M., and T. Tanaka. 1999. Biological characteristics of a larval endoparasitoid, Cotesia plutellae (Hymenoptera: Braconidae): host stage preference, subsequent sex ratio of progeny and mate location of males. Applied Entomology and Zoology 34:213-221.
43. Kerkis, J. 1931. The growth of the gonads in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 16:212-242.
44. Kraushaar, J., and W. U. Blanckenhorn. 2002. Population variation in sexual selection and its effect on body size allometry in two species of flies with contrasting sexual size dimorphism. Evolution 56:307-321.
45. LaBarbera, M. 1989. Analyzing body size as a factor in ecology and evolution. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 20:97-117.
46. Legrand, R. S., and D. H. Morse. 2000. Factors driving extreme sexual size dimorphism of a sit-and-wait predator under low density. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 71:643-664.
47. Leigh, S. R. 1992. Patterns of variation in the ontogeny of primate body size dimorphism. Journal of Human Evolution 23:27-50.
48. Leigh, S. R., and B. T. Shea. 1995. Ontogeny and the evolution of adult body-size dimorphism in apes. American Journal of Primatology 36:37-60.
49. Lindenfors, P., T. Székely, and J. D. Reynolds. 2003. Directional changes in sexual size dimorphism in shorebirds, gulls and alcids. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 16:1-9.
50. Maklakov, A. A., T. Bilde, and Y. Lubin. 2004. Sexual selection for increased male body size and protandry in a spider. Animal Behaviour 68:1041-1048.
51. Mikolajewski, D. J., T. Brodin, F. Johansson, and G. Joop. 2005. Phenotypic plasticity in gender specific life history: effects of food availability and predation. Oikos 110:91-100.
52. Miller, G. T., and S. Pitnick. 2002. Sperm-female coevolution in Drosophila. Science 298:1230-1233.
53. Nijhout, H. 2003. The control of body size in insects. Developmental Biology 261:1-9.
54. Nylin, S., and K. Gotthard. 1998. Plasticity in life history traits. Annual Review of Entomology 43:63-83.
55. Nylin, S., C. Wiklund, P. O. Wickman, and E. Garcia-Barros. 1993. Absence of trade-offs between sexual size dimorphism and early male emergence in a butterfly. Ecology 74:1414-1427.
56. Parker, G. A. 1970. Sperm competition and its evolutionary effect on copula duration in the fly Scatophaga stercoraria. Journal of Insect Physiology 16:1301-1328.
57. Parker, G. A., and S. P. Courtney. 1983. Seasonal incidence: adaptive variation in the timing of life history stages. Journal of Theoretical Biology 105:147-155.
58. Pitnick, S. 1993. Operational sex ratios and sperm limitation in populations of Drosophila pachea. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 33:383-391.
59. -. 1996. Investment in testes and the cost of making long sperm in Drosophila. American Naturalist 148:57-80.
60. Pitnick, S., and T. A. Markow. 1994. Large-male advantage associated with costs of sperm production in Drosophila hydei, a species with giant sperm. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 91:9277-9281.
61. Pitnick, S., T. A. Markow, and G. S. Spicer. 1995. Delayed male maturity is a cost of producing large sperm in Drosophila. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 92: 10614-10618.
62. Pont, A. C., and R. Meier. 2002. The Sepsidae (Diptera) of Europe. Fauna Entomologica Scandinavica 37:1-221.
63. Prenter, J., R. W. Elwood, and W. I. Montgomery. 1999. Sexual size dimorphism and reproductive investment by female spiders: a comparative analysis. Evolution 53:1987-1994.
64. Price, T. D. 1984. The evolution of sexual dimorphism in Darwin's finches. American Naturalist 123:500-518.
65. Purvis, A., and A. Rambaut. 1995. Comparative-analysis by independent contrasts (CAIC): an Apple-Macintosh application for analyzing comparative data. Comparative and Applied Biosciences 11:247-251.
66. Ralls, K. 1977. Sexual dimorphism in mammals: avian models and unanswered questions. American Naturalist 111:917-938.
67. Reed, D. A., and N. E. Beckage. 1997. Inhibition of testicular growth and development in Manduca sexta larvae parasitized by the braconid wasp Cotesia congregata. Journal of Insect Physiology 43:29-38.
68. Rensch, B. 1950. Die Abhängigkeit der relativen Sexualdifferenz von der Körpergrösse. Bonner Zoologische Beiträge 1:58-69.
69. Ricklefs, R. E. 1979. Adaptiation, constraint and compromise in avian postnatal development. Biological Reviews 54:269-290.
70. -. 1984. The optimization of development in altricial birds. Ecology 65:1602-1616.
71. Roff, D. A. 1980. Optimizing development time in a seasonal environment: the "ups and downs" of clinal variation. Oecologia (Berlin) 45:202-208.
72. -. 1992. The evolution of life histories: theory and analysis. Chapman & Hall, New York.
73. Rowe, L., G. Arnqvist, A. Sih, and J. J. Krupa. 1994. Sexual conflict and the evolutionary ecology of mating patterns: water striders as a model system. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 9:289-294.
74. Schluter, D., T. D. Price, and L. Rowe. 1991. Conflicting selection pressures and life history trade-offs. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 246:11-17.
75. Shine, R. 1988. The evolution of large body size in females: a critique of Darwin's "fecundity advantage model." American Naturalist 131:124-131.
76. -. 1989. Ecological causes for the evolution of sexual dimorphism: a review of the evidence. Quarterly Review of Biology 64: 419-461.
77. -. 1994. Sexual dimorphism in snakes revisited. Copeia 1994: 326-346.
78. Signorelli, M. 2002. Does sexual size dimorphism imply a corresponding development time difference? Diploma thesis, University of Zürich.
79. Simmons, L. W. 2001. Sperm competition and its evolutionary consequences in the insects. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
80. Singer, M. C. 1982. Sexual selection for small male size in butterflies. American Naturalist 119:440-443.
81. Sivinski, J. M., and G. Dodson. 1992. Sexual dimorphism in Anastrepha suspense and other tephritid fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae): possible roles of developmental rate, fecundity and dispersal. Journal of Insect Behavior 5:491-506.
82. Snook, R. R. 2005. Sperm in competition: not playing by the numbers. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 20:46-53.
83. Sokal, R. R., and F. J. Rohlf. 1995. Biometry: the principles and practice of statistics in biological research. 3rd ed. W. H. Freeman, San Francisco.
84. Székely, T., J. D. Reynolds, and J. Figuerola. 2000. Sexual size dimorphism in shorebirds, gulls and alcids: the influence of sexual and natural selection. Evolution 54:1404-1413.
85. Székely, T., R. P. Freckleton, and J. D. Reynolds. 2004. Sexual selection explains Rensch's rule of size dimorphism in shorebirds. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 101: 12224-12227.
86. Teather, K. L., and P. J. Weatherhead. 1994. Allometry, adaptation, and the growth and development of sexually dimorphic birds. Oikos 71:515-525.
87. Teder, T. 2005. Male-biased size dimorphism in ichneumonine wasps: the role of sexual selection for large male size. Ecological Entomology 30:342-349.
88. Travis, J. 1989. The role of optimizing selection in natural populations. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 20:279-296.
89. Uhl, G., S. Schmitt, M. A. Schäfer, and W. U. Blanckenhorn. 2004. Food and sex specific growth strategies in a spider. Evolutionary Ecology Research 6:523-540.
90. Werner, E. E., and B. R. Anholt. 1993. Ecological consequences of the trade-off between growth and mortality rates mediated by foraging activity. American Naturalist 142:242-272.
91. Wiklund, C., and T. Fagerström. 1977. Why do males emerge before females? a hypothesis to explain the incidence of protandry in butterflies. Oecologia (Berlin) 31:153-158.
92. Wiklund, C., and J. Forsberg. 1991. Sexual size dimorphism in relation to female polygamy and protandry in butterflies: a comparative study of Swedish Pieridae and Satyridae. Oikos 60:373-381.
93. Wiklund, C., and B. Karlsson. 1988. Sexual size dimorphism in relation to fecundity in some Swedish satyrid butterflies. American Naturalist 136:132-138.
94. Wiklund, C., S. Nylin, and J. Forsberg. 1991. Sex-related variation in growth rate as a result of selection for large size and protandry in a bivoltine butterfly, Pieris napi. Oikos 60:241-250.
95. Yasuda, H., and A. F. G. Dixon. 2002. Sexual size dimorphism in the two spot ladybird beetle Adalia bipunctata: developmental mechanism and its consequences for mating. Ecological Entomology 27:493-498.