Good genes, genetic compatibility and the evolution of polyandry: Use of the diallel cross to address competing hypotheses

Journal of Evolutionary Biology

Volumn 20, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 479-487

  Ivy, T M ^a,b  

^a ILLINOIS STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Crickets; Diallel cross; Genetic benefits; Genetic compatibility; Good genes; Intrinsic male quality; Paternal effects; Polyandry; Sexual selection

Indexed keywords

CRICKET; FITNESS; GENETIC VARIATION; GOOD GENES HYPOTHESIS; MATERNAL EFFECT; PARENTAL INVESTMENT; PATERNAL EFFECT; PHENOTYPE; POLYANDRY; SEXUAL SELECTION;

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; CROSS BREEDING; EVOLUTION; FEMALE; GENE; GENETIC VARIABILITY; GENETICS; GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT AND AGING; GRYLLIDAE; MALE; PHENOTYPE; PHYSIOLOGY; SEXUAL SELECTION; STATISTICAL MODEL;

ANIMALS; CROSSES, GENETIC; EVOLUTION; FEMALE; GENES, INSECT; GRYLLIDAE; LIKELIHOOD FUNCTIONS; MALE; MATING PREFERENCE, ANIMAL; PHENOTYPE; VARIATION (GENETICS);

GRYLLIDAE; GRYLLODES SIGILLATUS;

EID: 33847048515     PISSN: 1010061X     EISSN: 14209101     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1420-9101.2006.01269.x     Document Type: Article

References (67)

1. Alberts, B., Johnson, A., Lewis, J., Raff, M., Roberts, K. & Walten, P. 2002. The Molecular Biology of the Cell. Garland Science, New York.
2. Barmina, O., Gonzalo, M., McIntyre, L.M. & Kopp, A. 2005. Sex-and segment-specific modulation of gene expression profiles in Drosophila. Dev. Biol. 288: 528.
3. Bonhag, P.F. 1958. Ovarian structure and vitellogenesis in insects. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 3: 137-160.
4. Chapman, K.B. & Wolfner, M.F. 1988. Determination of malespecific gene expression in Drosophila accessory glands. Dev. Biol. 126: 195-202.
5. Charmantier, A. & Garant, D. 2005. Environmental quality and evolutionary potential: lessons from wild populations. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 272: 1415-1425.
6. Clutton-Brock, T.H. 1991. The Evolution of Parental Care. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
7. Cockerham, C.C. & Weir, B.S. 1977. Quadratic analyses of reciprocal crosses. Biometrics 33: 187-203.
8. Colegrave, N., Kotiaho, J.S. & Tomkins, J.L. 2002. Mate choice or polyandry: reconciling genetic compatibility and good genes sexual selection. Evol. Ecol. Res. 4: 911-917.
9. Crnokrak, P. & Roff, D.A. 1995. Dominance variance: associations with selection and fitness. Heredity 75: 530-540.
10. DeRose, M.A. & Roff, D.A. 1999. A comparison of inbreeding depression in life-history and morphological traits in animals. Evolution 53: 1288-1292.
11. Engqvist, L. 2006. Females benefit from mating with different males in the scorpionfly Panorpa cognata. Behav. Ecol. 17: 435-440.
12. Evans, J.P. & Marshall, D.J. 2005. Male-by-female interactions influence fertilization success and mediate the benefits of polyandry in the sea urchin Heliocidaris erythrogramma. Evolution 59: 106-112.
13. Falconer, D.S. & Mackay, T.F.C. 1996. Introduction to Quantitative Genetics. Prentice Hall, Harlow, UK.
14. Fitch, K.R., Yasuda, G.K., Owens, K.N. & Wakimoto, B.T. 1998. Paternal effects in Drosophila: implications for mechanisms of early development. Curr. Top. Dev. Biol. 38: 1-34.
15. Fox, C.W. & Rauter, C.M. 2003. Bet-hedging and the evolution of multiple mating. Evol. Ecol. Res. 5: 273-286.
16. Fry, J.D. 2004. Estimation of genetic variances and covariances by restricted maximum likelihood using PROC MIXED. In: Genetic Analysis of Complex Traits using SAS (A. Saxton, ed.), pp. 11-34. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC.
17. García-González, F. & Simmons, L.W. 2005. The evolution of polyandry: intrinsic sire effects contribute to embryo viability. J. Evol. Biol. 18: 1097-1103.
18. Greenfield, M.D. & Rodriguez, R.L. 2004. Genotype-environment interaction and the reliability of mating signals. Anim. Behav. 68: 1461-1468.
19. Grether, G.F., Millie, D.F., Bryant, M.J., Reznick, D.N. & Mayea, W. 2001. Rain forest canopy cover, resource availability, and life history evolution in guppies. Ecology 82: 1546-1559.
20. Hartl, D.L., Dykhuizen, D.E. & Dean, A.M. 1985. Limits of adaptation the evolution of selective neutrality. Genetics 111: 655-674.
21. Hoffmann, A.A. & Merila, J. 1999. Heritable variation and evolution under favourable and unfavourable conditions. Trends Ecol. Evol. 14: 96-101.
22. Hoffmann, A.A. & Turelli, M. 1997. Cytoplasmic incompatibility in insects. In: Influential Passenger: Inherited Microorganisms and Arthropod Reproduction (S.L. O'Neill, A.A. Hoffmann & J.H. Werren, eds), pp. 42-80. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
23. Hosken, D.J., Garner, T.W.J., Tregenza, T., Wedell, N. & Ward, P.I. 2003. Superior sperm competitors sire higher-quality young. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 270: 1933-1938.
24. Houle, D. 1992. Comparing evolvability and variability of quantitative traits. Genetics 130: 195-204.
25. Hunt, J. & Simmons, L.W. 2002. The genetics of maternal care: direct and indirect genetic effects on phenotype in the dung beetle Onthophagus taurus. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 99: 6828-6832.
26. Hunt, J., Bussiere, L.F., Jennions, M.D. & Brooks, R. 2004. What is genetic quality? Trends Ecol. Evol. 19: 329-333.
27. Ivy, T.M. & Sakaluk, S.K. 2005. Polyandry promotes enhanced offspring survival in decorated crickets. Evolution 59: 152-159.
28. Ivy, T.M., Johnson, J.C. & Sakaluk, S.K. 1999. Hydration benefits to courtship feeding in crickets. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 266: 1523-1527.
29. Jennions, M.D. 1997. Female promiscuity and genetic incompatibility. Trends Ecol. Evol. 12: 251-253.
30. Jennions, M.D. & Petrie, M. 2000. Why do females mate multiply? A review of the genetic benefits. Biol. Rev. 75: 21-64.
31. Kamoda, S., Masui, S., Ishikawa, H. & Sasaki, T. 2000. Wolbachia infection and cytoplasmic incompatibility in the cricket Teleogryllus taiwanemma. J. Exp. Biol. 203: 2503-2509.
32. Kasuya, E. & Sato, N. 1998. Effects of the consumption of male spermatophylax on the oviposition schedule of females in the decorated cricket, Gryllodes sigillatus. Zool. Sci. 15: 127-130.
33. Kokko, H., Brooks, R., McNamara, J.M. & Houston, A.I. 2002. The sexual selection continuum. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 269: 1331-1340.
34. Lozovskaya, E.R., Hartl, D.L. & Petrov, D.A. 1995. Genomic regulation of transposable elements in Drosophila. Curr. Opin. Gen. Dev. 5: 768-773.
35. Lynch, M. & Walsh, B. 1998. Genetics and Analysis of Quantitative Traits. Sinauer Associates Inc., Sunderland, MA.
36. Manoli, D.S., Foss, M., Villella, A., Taylor, B.J., Hall, J.C. & Baker, B.S. 2005. Male-specific fruitless specifies the neural substrates of Drosophila courtship behaviour. Nature 436: 395.
37. Merilä, J. & Sheldon, B.C. 1999. Genetic architecture of fitness and nonfitness traits: empirical patterns and development of ideas. Heredity 83: 103-109.
38. Neff, B.D. & Pitcher, T.E. 2005. Genetic quality and sexual selection: an integrated framework for good genes and compatible genes. Mol. Ecol. 14: 19-38.
39. Newcomer, S.D., Zeh, J.A. & Zeh, D.W. 1999. Genetic benefits enhance the reproductive success of polyandrous females. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 96: 10236-10241.
40. Puurtinen, M., Ketola, T. & Kotiaho, J.S. 2005. Genetic compatibility and sexual selection. Trends Ecol. Evol. 20: 157-158.
41. Qvarnstrom, A. & Price, T.D. 2001. Maternal effects, paternal effects and sexual selection. Trends Ecol. Evol. 16: 95-100.
42. Rand, D.M., Clark, A.G. & Kann, L.M. 2001. Sexually antagonistic cytonuclear fitness interactions in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 159: 173-187.
43. Reik, W. & Walter, J. 2001. Genomic imprinting: parental influence on the genome. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2: 21-32.
44. Rice, W.R. & Holland, B. 1997. The enemies within: intergenomic conflict, interlocus contest evolution (ICE), and the intraspecific red queen. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 41: 1-10.
45. Rio, D.C. 2002. P transposable elements in Drosophila melanogaster. In: Mobile DNA II (N.L. Craig, R. Craigie, M. Gellert & A.M. Lambowitz, eds), pp. 484-519. ASM Press, Washington DC.
46. Sakaluk, S.K. 1984. Males feed females to ensure complete sperm transfer. Science 223: 609-610.
47. Sakaluk, S.K., Schaus, J.M., Eggert, A.K., Snedden, W.A. & Brady, P.L. 2002. Polyandry and fitness of offspring reared under varying nutritional stress in decorated crickets. Evolution 56: 1999-2007.
48. SAS Institute, Inc. 2004. SAS OnlineDoc® 9.1.3. SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC.
49. Simmons, L.W. 2005. The evolution of polyandry: sperm competition, sperm selection, and offspring viability. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 36: 125-146.
50. Smith, R.L. & Thomas, W.B. 1988. Southwestern distribution and habitat ecology of Gryllodes supplicans. Bull. Entomol. Soc. Am. 34: 186-190.
51. Svensson, E., Sinervo, B. & Comendant, T. 2001. Condition, genotype-by-environment interaction, and correlational selection in lizard life-history morphs. Evolution 55: 2053-2069.
52. Tallamy, D.W., Darlington, M.B., Pesek, J.D. & Powell, B.E. 2003. Copulatory courtship signals male genetic quality in cucumber beetles. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 270: 77-82.
53. Tregenza, T. & Wedell, N. 1998. Benefits of multiple mates in the cricket Gryllus bimaculatus. Evolution 52: 1726-1730.
54. Tregenza, T. & Wedell, N. 2000. Genetic compatibility, mate choice and patterns of parentage: invited review. Mol. Ecol. 9: 1013-1027.
55. Tregenza, T. & Wedell, N. 2002. Polyandrous females avoid costs of inbreeding. Nature 415: 71-73.
56. Tregenza, T., Wedell, N., Hosken, D.J. & Wards, P.I. 2003. Maternal effects on offspring depend on female mating pattern and offspring environment in yellow dung flies. Evolution 57: 297-304.
57. Ward, P.J. 1994. Parent-offspring regression and extreme environments. Heredity 72: 574-581.
58. Wedekind, C., Müller, R. & Spicher, H. 2001. Potential genetic benefits of mate selection in whitefish. J. Evol. Biol. 14: 980-986.
59. Werren, J.H. 1998. Wolbachia and speciation. In: Endless Forms: Species and Speciation (D.J. Howard & S.H. Berlocher, eds), pp. 245-260. Oxford Univeristy Press, New York.
60. Werren, J.H., Zhang, W. & Guo, L.R. 1995. Evolution and phylogeny of Wolbachia - reproductive parasites of arthropods. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 261: 55-63.
61. Will, M.W. & Sakaluk, S.K. 1994. Courtship feeding in decorated crickets: is the spermatophylax a sham? Anim. Behav. 48: 1309-1315.
62. Yasuda, G.K., Schubiger, G. & Wakimoto, B.T. 1995. Genetic characterization of ms(3)K81, a paternal effect gene of Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 140: 219-229.
63. Yasui, Y. 1998. The genetic benefits of female multiple mating reconsidered. Trends Ecol. Evol. 13: 246-250.
64. Zeh, D.W. 1985. Paternal investment by terrestrial arthropods. Am. Zool. 25: 785-805.
65. Zeh, J.A. & Zeh, D.W. 1996. The evolution of polyandry. I. Intragenomic conflict and genetic incompatibility. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 263: 1711-1717.
66. Zeh, J.A. & Zeh, D.W. 2003. Toward a new sexual selection paradigm: polyandry, conflict and incompatibility. Ethology 109: 929-950.
67. Zeh, J.A. & Zeh, D.W. 2005. Maternal inheritance, sexual conflict and the maladapted male. Trends Genet. 21: 281-286.