The form of sexual selection on male genitalia cannot be inferred from within-population variance and allometry - A case study in Aquarius remigis

Evolution

Volumn 61, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 825-837

  Bertin, Angéline ^a,b   Fairbairn, Daphne J ^b  

^a SOUTHWEST FOUNDATION FOR BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Genitalia; Gerridae; One size fits all hypothesis; Sexual selection; Static allometry

Indexed keywords

ALLOMETRY; INSECT; MALE; MORPHOLOGY; PHENOTYPE; POPULATION GENETICS; REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY; SEXUAL SELECTION;

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; EVOLUTION; GENETIC SELECTION; GENETICS; HETEROPTERA; HISTOLOGY; MALE; MALE GENITAL SYSTEM; MORPHOMETRICS; SEX DIFFERENCE;

ANIMALS; BODY WEIGHTS AND MEASURES; EVOLUTION; GENITALIA, MALE; HETEROPTERA; MALE; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; SELECTION (GENETICS); SEX FACTORS;

AQUARIUS REMIGIS; ARACHNIDA; ARTHROPODA; GERRIDAE; HEXAPODA;

EID: 34047239538     PISSN: 00143820     EISSN: 15585646     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2007.00074.x     Document Type: Article

References (87)

1. Alexander, R., D. Marshall, and J. Cooley. 1997. Evolutionary perspectives on insect mating. Pp. 1-31 in J. Choe, and B. Crespi, eds. The evolution of mating systems in insects and arachnids. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK.
2. Andrade, C. A. C., L. M. Hatadani, and L. B. Klaczko. 2005. Phenotypic plasticity of the aedeagus of Drosophila mediopunctata: effect of the temperature. J. Therm. Biol. 30:518-523.
3. Arnqvist, G. 1989. Multiple mating in a water strider-mutual benefits or intersexual conflict. Anim. Behav. 38:749-756.
4. _. 1997. The evolution of animal genitalia: distinguishing between hypotheses by single species studies. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. Lond. 60:365-379.
5. _. 1998. Comparative evidence for the evolution of genitalia by sexual selection. Nature 393:784-786.
6. Arnqvist, G., and I. Danielsson. 1999. Copulatory behavior, genital morphology, and male fertilization success in water striders. Evolution 53:147-156.
7. Arnqvist, G., and R. Thornhill. 1998. Evolution of animal genitalia: patterns of phenotypic and genotypic variation and condition dependence of genital and non-genital morphology in water strider (Heteroptera: Gerridae: Insecta). Genet. Res. 71:193-212.
8. Baminger, H., and M. Haase. 2000. Variation of distal genitalia in the simultaneously hermaphroditic land snail Arianta arbustorum (Pulmonata, Stylommatophora) caused by sexual selection. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. Lond. 71:599-613.
9. Bernstein, S., and R. Bernstein. 2002. Allometry of male genitalia in a species of soldier beetle: support for the one-size-fits-all hypothesis. Evolution 56:1707-1710.
10. Bertin, A., and D. J. Fairbairn. 2005. One tool, many uses: precopulatory sexual selection on genital morphology in Aquarius remigis. J. Evol. Biol. 18:949-961.
11. Bonduriansky, R., and T. Day. 2003. The evolution of static allometry in sexually selected traits. Evolution 57:2450-2458.
12. Briceno, R. D., W. G. Eberhard, and S. Quilici. 2005. Comparative allometry and sexual behavior of four fruit fly species in the tribe Ceratitidini (Diptera : Tephritidae). J. Kans. Entomol. Soc. 78:20-33.
13. Campbell, V., and D. J. Fairbairn. 2001. Prolonged copulation and the internal dynamics of sperm transfer in the water strider Aquarius remigis. Can. J. Zool. 79:1801-1812.
14. Clarke, M. R. B. 1980. The reduced major axis of a bivariate sample. Biometrika 67:441-446.
15. Danielsson, I., and C. Askenmo. 1999. Male genital traits and mating interval affect male fertilization success in the water strider Gerris lacustris. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 46:149-156.
16. de Visser, J. A. G. M., J. Hermisson, G. P.Wagner, L. A. Meyers, H. Bagheri-Chaichian, J. L. Blanchard, L. Chao, J. M. Cheverud, S. F. Elena, W. Fontana, G. Gibson, T. F. Hansen, D. Krakauer, R. C. Lewontin, C. Ofria, S. H. Rice, G. von Dassow, A. Wagner, and M. C. Whitlock. 2003. Perspective: evolution and detection of genetic robustness. Evolution 57:1959-1972.
17. Eberhard, W. G. 1985. Sexual selection and animal genitalia. Harvard Univ. Press, Harvard.
18. _. 2002. Natural history and behavior of Chymomyza mycopelates and C. exophthalma (Diptera : Drosophilidae), and allometry of structures used as signals, weapons, and spore collectors. Can. Entomol. 134:667-687.
19. _. 2004a. Male-female conflict and genitalia: failure to confirm predictions in insects and spiders. Biol. Rev. 79:121-186.
20. _. 2004b. Rapid divergent evolution of sexual morphology: comparative tests of antagonistic coevolution and traditional female choice. Evolution 58:1947-1970.
21. _. 2006. Sexually antagonistic coevolution in insects is associated with only limited morphological diversity. J. Evol. Biol. 19:657-681.
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. Eberhard, W. G., B. A. Huber, and R. L. Rodriguez. 1999. Don't forget the biology: a reply to Green. Evolution 53:1624-1627.
24. Emlen, D. J., and H. F. Nijhout. 2000. The development and evolution of exaggerated morphologies in insects. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 45:661-708.
25. Endler, J. A. 1986. Natural selection in the wild. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, NJ.
26. Fairbairn, D. J. 1992. The origins of allometry-size and shape polymorphism in the common waterstrider, Gerris remigis Say (Heteroptera, Gerridae). Biol. J. Linn. Soc. Lond. 45:167-186.
27. _. 2005. Allometry for sexual size dimorphism: testing two hypotheses for Rensch's rule in the water strider Aquarius remigis. Am. Nat. 166:S69-S84.
28. _. 2007. Sexual dimorphism in thewater strider Aquarius remigis: a case study of adaptation in response to sexually antagonistic selection. in D. J. Fairbairn, W. U. Blanckenhorn, and T. Szekely, eds. Sex, size and gender roles. Evolutionary studies of sexual size dimorphism. Oxford Univ. Press, U.K., In press.
29. 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. Am. Nat. 144:101-118.
30. _. 1996. Sexual selection and the evolution of sexual size dimorphism in the water strider, Aquarius remigis. Evolution 50:1549-1559.
31. Fairbairn, D. J., R. Vermette, N. N. Kapoor, and N. Zahiri. 2003. Functional morphology of sexually selected gentalia in the water strider Aquarius remigis. Can. J. Zool. 81:400-413.
32. Ferguson, I. M., and D. J. Fairbairn. 2000. Sex-specific selection and sexual size dimorphism in the waterstrider Aquarius remigis. J. Evol. Biol. 13:160-170.
33. Flatt, T. 2005. The evolutionary genetics of canalization. Q. Rev. Biol. 80:287-316.
34. Funke, S., and B. A. Huber. 2005. Allometry of genitalia and fighting structures in Linyphia triangularis (Araneae, Linyphiidae). J. Arachnol. 33:870-872.
35. Gallant, S. L., and D. J. Fairbairn. 1996. A new species of Aquarius from the southeastern United States, with electrophoretic analysis of the clade containing Gerris, Limnoporus, and Aquarius (Hemiptera: Gerridae). Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 89:637-644.
36. Gallant, S. L., R. F. Preziosi, and D. J. Fairbairn. 1993. Clinical variation in eastern populations of the waterstrider Aquarius remigis-gradual intergradation or discontinuity. Evolution 47:957-964.
37. Geisser, S., and S. W. Greenhouse. 1958. An extension of Box's results on the use of the F distribution in multivariate analysis. Ann. Math. Stat. 29:885-891.
38. Gould, S. J. 1966. Allometry and size in ontogeny and phylogeny. Biol. Rev. Camb. Philos. Soc. 41:587-640.
39. Green, A. J. 1992. Positive allometry is likely with mate choice, competitive display and other functions. Anim. Behav. 43:170-172.
40. _. 1999. Allometry of genitalia in insects and spiders: one size does not fit all. Evolution 53:1621-1624.
41. Greenhouse, S.W., and S. Geisser. 1959. On methods in the analysis of profile data. Psychometrika 24:95-112.
42. Hosken, D. J., and P. Stockley. 2004. Sexual selection and genital evolution. Trends Ecol. Evol. 19:87-93.
43. Hosken, D. J., A. M. Minder, and P. I. Ward. 2005. Male genital allometry in scathophagidae (Diptera). Evol. Ecol. 19:501-515.
44. House, C. M., and L.W. Simmons. 2003. Genital morphology and fertilization success in the dung beetle Onthophagus taurus: an example of sexually selected male genitalia. Proc. R. Soc. Lond., B., Biol. Sci. 270:447-455.
45. Huber, B. A. 2005. Evidence for directional selection on male abdomen size in Mecolaesthus longissimus Simon (Araneae, Pholcidae). J. Arachnol. 33:573-581.
46. Huxley, J. S. 1972. Problems of relative growth. Dover Publications, New York.
47. Iwahashi, O., and W. Routhier. 2001. Aedeagal length and its variation of the peach fruit fly, Bactrocera zonata (Saunders) (Diptera : Tephritidae), which recently invaded Egypt. Appl. Entomol. Zool 36:13-17.
48. Kawano, K. 2006. Sexual dimorphism and the making of oversized male characters in beetles (Coleoptera). Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 99:327-341.
49. Kelly, C. D., J. G. J. Godin, and G. Abdallah. 2000. Geographical variation in the male intromittent organ of theTrinidadian guppy (Poecilia reticulata). Can. J. Zool. 78:1674-1680.
50. Keselman, H. J. 1998. Testing treatment effects in repeated measures designs: an update for psychophysiological researchers. Psychophysiology 35:470-478.
51. Keselman, H. J., J. Algina, and R. K. Kowalchuk. 2001. The analysis of repeated measures designs: a review. Br. J. Math. Stat. Psychol. 54:1-20.
52. Klingenberg, C. P., and M. Zimmermann. 1992. Static, ontogenic, and evolutionary allometry - a multivariate comparison in 9 Species of waterstriders. Am. Nat. 140:601-620.
53. Littell, R. C., P. R. Henry, and C. B. Ammerman. 1998. Statistical analysis of repeated measures data using SAS procedures. J. Anim. Sci. 76:1216-1231.
54. Littell, R. C., J. Pendergast, and R. Natarajan. 2000. Modelling covariance structure in the analysis of repeated measures data. Stat. Med. 19:1793-1819.
55. McArdle, B. H. 1988. The structural relationship-regression in biology. Can. J. Zool. 66:2329-2339.
56. _. 2003. Lines, models, and errors: regression in the field. Limnol. Oceanogr. 48:1363-1366.
57. Miller, E. H., and L. E. Burton. 2001. It's all relative: allometry and variation in the baculum (os penis) of the harp seal, Pagophilus groenlandicus (Carnivora : Phocidae). Biol. J. Linn. Soc. Lond. 72:345-355.
58. Mutanen, M., and A. Kaitala. 2006. Genital variation in a dimorphic moth Selenia tetralunaria (Lepidoptera, Geometridae). Biol. J. Linn. Soc. Lond. 87:297-307.
59. Ohno, S., S. Hoshizaki, Y. Ishikawa, S. Tatsuki, and S. Akimoto. 2003. Allometry of male genitalia in a lepidopteran species, Ostrinia latipennis (Lepidoptera : Crambidae). Appl. Entomol. Zool 38:313-319.
60. Palestrini, C., A. Rolando, and P. Laiolo. 2000. Allometric relationships and character evolution in Onthophagus taurus (Coleoptera : Scarabaeidae). Can. J. Zool. 78:1199-1206.
61. Petrie, M. 1988. Intraspecific variation in structures that display competitive ability-large animals invest relatively more. Anim. Behav. 36:1174-1179.
62. _. 1992. Are all secondary sexual display structures positively allometric and, if so, why?. Anim. Behav. 43:173-175.
63. Polihronakis, M. 2006. Morphometric analysis of intraspecific shape variation in male and female genitalia of Phyllophaga hirticula (Coleoptera : Scarabaeidae : Melolonthinae). Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 99:144-150.
64. Pomiankowski, A., and A. P. Møller. 1995. A resolution of the lek paradox. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B. 260:21-29.
65. Preziosi, R. F., and D. J. Fairbairn. 1992. Genetic population structure and levels of gene flow in the stream dwelling waterstrider, Aquarius (=Gerris) remigis (Hemiptera, Gerridae). Evolution 46:430-444.
66. _. 1996. Sexual size dimorphism and selection in the wild in the waterstrider Aquarius remigis: body size, components of body size and male mating success. J. Evol. Biol. 9:317-336.
67. _. 2000. Lifetime selection on adult body size and components of body size in a waterstrider: opposing selection and maintenance of sexual size dimorphism. Evolution 54:558-566.
68. Preziosi, R. F., and D. A. Roff. 1998. Evidence of genetic isolation between sexually monomorphic and sexually dimorphic traits in the water strider Aquarius remigis. Heredity 81:92-99.
69. Rice, W. R., and S. D. Gaines. 1994. Heads I win, tails you lose-testing directional alternative hypotheses in ecological and evolutionary research. Trends Ecol. Evol. 9:235-237.
70. Rubenstein, D. I. 1984. Resource acquisition and alternative mating strategies in water striders. Am. Zool. 24:345-353.
71. _. 1989. Sperm competition in the water strider, Gerris remigis. Anim. Behav. 38:631-636.
72. Ryan, M. J., and A. Keddyhector. 1992. Directional patterns of female mate choice and the role of sensory biases. Am. Nat. 139:S4-S35.
73. Schmitz, G., K. Reinhold, and P. Wagner. 2000. Allometric relationship between genitalic size and body size in two species of mordellid beetles (Coleoptera : Mordellidae). Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 93:637-639.
74. Sih, A., M. Lauer, and J. J. Krupa. 2002. Path analysis and the relative importance of male-female conflict, female choice and male-male competition in water striders. Anim. Behav. 63:1079-1089.
75. Simmons, L. W. 2001. Sperm competition and its evolutionary consequences in the insects. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, NJ.
76. Simmons, L.W., and J. L. Tomkins. 1996. Sexual selection and the allometry of earwig forceps. Evol. Ecol. 10:97-104.
77. Sirot, L. K. 2003. The evolution of insect mating structures through sexual selection. Fla. Entomol. 86:124-133.
78. Sokal, R. R., and J. F. Rohlf. 1995. Biometry: the principles and practice of statistics in biological research. W. H. Freeman and Co., New York.
79. Suter, R. B., and J. Gruenwald. 2000. Spider size and locomotion on the water surface (Araneae, Pisauridae). J. Arachnol. 28:300-308.
80. Takami, Y. 2003. Experimental analysis of the effect of genital morphology on insemination success in the ground beetle Carabus insulicola (Coleoptera Carabidae). Ethol. Ecol. Evol. 15:51-61.
81. Tan, C. Y., and B. Iglewicz. 1999. Measurement methods comparisons and linear statistical relationship. Technometrics 41:192-201.
82. Tomkins, J. L., and L.W. Simmons. 1996. Dimorphisms and fluctuating asymmetry in the forceps of male earwigs. J. Evol. Biol. 9:753-770.
83. Vencl, F. V. 2004. Allometry and proximate mechanisms of sexual selection in Photinus fireflies, and some other beetles. Integr. Comp. Biol. 44:242-249.
84. Vermette, R., and D. J. Fairbairn. 2002. How well do mating frequency and duration predict paternity success in the polygynandrous water strider Aquarius remigis? Evolution 56:1808-1820.
85. Waage, J. K. 1979. Dual function of the damselfly penis: sperm removal and transfer. Science 203:916-918.
86. Weigensberg, I., and D. J. Fairbairn. 1994. Conflicts-of-interest between the sexes - a study of mating interactions in a semiaquatic bug. Anim. Behav. 48:893-901.
87. _. 1996. The sexual arms race and phenotypic correlates of mating success in the waterstrider, Aquarius remigis (Hemiptera: Gerridae). J. Insect Behav. 9:307-319.