Secondary sexual ornamentation and non-additive genetic benefits of female mate choice

Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

Volumn 274, Issue 1616, 2007, Pages 1395-1402

  Reid, Jane M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Heterozygosity; Inbreeding depression; Indirect fitness benefits; Intersexual selection; Relatedness

Indexed keywords

GENETIC VARIATION; GOOD GENES HYPOTHESIS; HETEROZYGOSITY; INBREEDING DEPRESSION; KINSHIP; MATE CHOICE; ORNAMENTATION; RELATEDNESS; SECONDARY SEXUAL CHARACTERISTICS; SELECTION; SEXUAL SELECTION; SONGBIRD;

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; FEMALE; FITNESS; GENETIC MODEL; HETEROZYGOSITY; INBREEDING DEPRESSION; MALE; MATE CHOICE; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGENY; SEXUAL SELECTION; SINGING; SPARROW;

MELOSPIZA; MELOSPIZA MELODIA;

EID: 34447326412     PISSN: 09628452     EISSN: 14712970     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2007.0063     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Alatalo, R. V., Kotiaho, J., Mappes, J. & Parri, S. 1998 Mate choice for offspring performance: major benefits or minor costs? Proc. R. Soc. B 265, 2297-2301. (doi:10.1098/rspb.1998.0574)
2. Andersson, M. 1994 Sexual selection. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
3. Andersson, M. & Simmons, L. W. 2006 Sexual selection and mate choice. Trends Ecol. Evol. 21, 296-302. (doi:10.1016/j.tree.2006.03.015)
4. Aspi, J. 2000 Inbreeding and outbreeding depression in male courtship song characters in Drosophila montana. Heredity 84, 273-282. (doi:10.1046/j.1365-2540.2000.00655.x)
5. Beecher, M. D., Campbell, S. E. & Nordby, J. C. 2000 Territory tenure in song sparrows is related to song sharing with neighbours, but not to repertoire size. Anim. Behav. 59, 29-37. (doi:10.1006/anbe.1999. 1304)
6. Bensch, S., Andrén, H., Hansson, B., Pedersen, H. C., Sand, H., Sejberg, D., Wabakken, P., Åkesson, M. & Liberg, O. 2006 Selection for heterozygosity gives hope to a wild population of inbred wolves. PLoS One 1, e72. (doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0000072)
7. Cassidy, A. L. E. V. 1993 Song variation and learning in island populations of song sparrows. PhD thesis, University of British Columbia.
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. Cotton, S., Fowler, K. & Pomiankowski, A. 2004 Do sexual ornaments demonstrate heightened condition-dependent expression as predicted by the handicap hypothesis? Proc. R. Soc. B 271, 771-783. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2004.2688)
10. Crnokrak, P. & Roff, D. A. 1999 Inbreeding depression in the wild. Heredity 83, 260-270. (doi:10.1038/sj.hdy.6885530)
11. Darwin, C. 1871 The descent of man and selection in relation to sex. London, UK: Murray.
12. Falconer, D. S. & Mackay, T. R. C. 1996 Introduction to quantitative genetics. London, UK: Longman.
13. Foerster, K., Delhey, K., Johnsen, A., Lifjeld, J. T. & Kempenaers, B. 2003 Females increase offspring heterozygosity and fitness through extra-pair matings. Nature 425, 714-717. (doi:10.1038/nature01969)
14. Hamilton, W. D. & Zuk, M. 1982 Heritable true fitness and bright birds: a role for parasites? Science 218, 384-387. (doi:10.1126/science.7123238)
15. Hansson, B. & Westerberg, L. 2002 On the correlation between heterozygosity and fitness in natural populations. Mol. Ecol. 11, 2467-2474. (doi:10.1046/j.1365-294X.2002.01644.x)
16. Hansson, B., Bensch, S., Hasselquist, D. & Nielson, B. 2002 Restricted dispersal in a long-distance migrant bird with a patchy distribution, the great reed warbler. Oecologia 130, 536-542. (doi:10.1007/s00442-001-0831-2)
17. Hansson, B., Hasselquist, D. & Bensch, S. 2004 Do female great reed warblers seek extra-pair fertilizations to avoid inbreeding? Proc. R. Soc. B 271, S290-S292. (doi:10.1098/rsbl.2004.0164)
18. Hasselquist, D., Bensch, S. & von Schantz, T. 1996 Correlation between male song repertoire, extra-pair paternity and offspring survival in the great reed warbler. Nature 381, 229-232. (doi:10.1038/381229a0)
19. Höglund, J., Piertney, S. B., Alatalo, R. V., Lindell, J., Lundberg, A. & Rintamaki, P. T. 2002 Inbreeding depression and male fitness in black grouse. Proc. R. Soc. B 269, 711-715. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2001.1937)
20. Hunt, J., Bussière, L. F., Jennions, M. D. & Brooks, R. 2004 What is genetic quality? Trends Ecol. Evol. 19, 329-333. (doi:10.1016/j.tree.2004.03.035)
21. Jia, F. Y. & Greenfield, M. D. 1997 When are good genes good? Variable outcomes of female choice in wax moths. Proc. R. Soc. B 264, 1057-1063. (doi:10.1098/rspb.1997.0146)
22. Jones, T. M., Quinnell, R. J. & Balmford, A. 1998 Fisherian flies: benefits of female choice in a lekking sandfly. Proc. R. Soc. B 265, 1651-1657. (doi:10.1098/rspb.1998.0484)
23. Joron, M. & Brakefield, P. M. 2003 Captivity masks inbreeding effects on male mating success in butterflies. Nature 424, 191-194. (doi:10.1038/nature01713)
24. Keller, L. F. 1998 Inbreeding and its fitness effects in an insular population of song sparrows (Melospiza melodia). Evolution 52, 240-250. (doi:10.2307/2410939)
25. Keller, L. F. & Waller, D. M. 2002 Inbreeding effects in wild populations. Trends Ecol. Evol. 17, 230-241. (doi:10.1016/S0169- 5347(02)02489-8)
26. Kirkpatrick, M. 1996 Good genes and direct selection in the evolution of mating preferences. Evolution 50, 2125-2140. (doi:10.2307/2410684)
27. Kirkpatrick, M. & Ryan, M. 1991 The evolution of mating preferences and the paradox of the lek. Nature 350, 33-39. (doi:10.1038/350033a0)
28. Kokko, H. & Brooks, R. 2003 Sexy to die for? Sexual selection and the risk of extinction. Ann. Zool. Fenn. 40, 207-219.
29. Kokko, H., Brooks, R., Jennions, M. D. & Morley, J. 2003 The evolution of mate choice and mating biases. Proc. R. Soc. B 270, 653-664. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2002.2235)
30. Kokko, H., Jennions, M. D. & Brooks, R. 2006 Unifying and testing models of sexual selection. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 37, 43-66. (doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.37.091305.110259)
31. Komdeur, J. & Hatchwell, B. J. 1999 Kin recognition: function and mechanism in avian societies. Trends Ecol. Evol. 14, 237-241. (doi:10.1016/S0169-5347(98)01573-0)
32. Kristensen, T. N., Sorensen, P., Kruhoffer, M., Pedersen, K. S. & Loeschcke, V. 2005 Genome-wide analysis on inbreeding effects on gene expression in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 171, 157-167. (doi:10.1534/genetics.104.039610)
33. Krokene, C., Rigstad, E., Dale, M. & Lifjeld, J. T. 1998 The function of extra-pair paternity in blue tits and great tits: good genes or fertility insurance? Behav. Ecol. 9, 649-656. (doi:10.1093/beheco/9.6.649)
34. Lehmann, L., Keller, L. F. & Kokko, H. 2006 Mate choice evolution, dominance effects and the maintenance of genetic variation. J. Theor. Biol. 244, 282-295. (doi:10.1016/j.jtbi.2006.07.033)
35. Manly, B. F. J. 2007 Randomization, bootstrap and Monte Carlo methods in biology. New York, NY: Chapman Hall.
36. Marshall, R. C., Buchanan, K. L. & Catchpole, C. K. 2003 Sexual selection and individual genetic diversity in a songbird. Proc. R. Soc. B 270, S248-S250.
37. Mateo, J. M. & Johnston, R. E. 2000 Kin recognition and the 'armpit effect': evidence of self-referent phenotype matching. Proc. R. Soc. B 267, 695-700. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2000.1058)
38. Maynard Smith, J. 1956 Fertility, mating behavior, and sexual selection in Drosophila subobscura. J. Genet. 54, 261-279.
39. Mays, H. L. & Hill, G. E. 2004 Choosing mates: good genes versus genes that are a good fit. Trends Ecol. Evol. 19, 554-559. (doi:10.1016/j.tree.2004.07.018)
40. Møller, A. P. & Alatalo, R. V. 1999 Good-genes effects in sexual selection. Proc. R. Soc. B 266, 85-91. (doi:10.1098/rspb. 1999.0607)
41. 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. (doi:10.1111/j.1365-294X.2004.02395.x)
42. O'Connor, K. D., Marr, A. B., Arcese, P., Keller, L. F., Jeffery, K. J. & Bruford, M. W. 2006 Extra-pair fertilization and effective population size in the song sparrow Melospiza melodia. J. Avian Biol. 37, 572-578. (doi:10.1111/j.2006.0908-8857.03681.x)
43. Petrie, M. 1994 Improved growth and survival of offspring of peacocks with more elaborate trains. Nature 371, 598-599. (doi:10.1038/371598a0)
44. Petrie, M., Krupa, A. & Burke, T. 1999 Peacocks lek with relatives even in the absence of social and environmental cues. Nature 401, 155-157. (doi:10.1038/43651)
45. Pusey, A. & Wolf, M. 1996 Inbreeding avoidance in animals. Trends Ecol. Evol. 11, 201-206. (doi:10.1016/0169-5347(96)10028-8)
46. Puurtinen, M., Ketola, T. & Kotiaho, J. S. 2005 Genetic compatibility and sexual selection. Trends Ecol. Evol. 20, 157-158. (doi:10.1016/j.tree.2005.02.005)
47. Qvarnström, A., Brommer, J. E. & Gustafsson, L. 2006 Testing the genetics underlying the co-evolution of mate choice and ornament in the wild. Nature 441, 84-86.
48. Reid, J. M., Arcese, P. & Keller, L. F. 2003 Inbreeding depresses immune response in song sparrows (Melospiza melodia): direct and inter-generational effects. Proc. R. Soc. B 270, 2151-2157. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2003.2480)
49. Reid, J. M., Arcese, P., Cassidy, A. L. E. V., Hiebert, S. M., Smith, J. N. M., Stoddard, P. K., Marr, A. B. & Keller, L. F. 2004 Song repertoire size predicts initial mating success in male song sparrows (Melospiza melodia). Anim. Behav. 68, 1055-1063. (doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2004.07. 003)
50. Reid, J. M., Arcese, P., Cassidy, A. L. E. V., Marr, A. B., Smith, J. N. M. & Keller, L. F. 2005 Hamilton and Zuk meet heterozygosity? Song repertoire size signals inbreeding and immunity in song sparrows (Melospiza melodia). Proc. R. Soc. B 272, 481-487. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2004.2983)
51. Reid, J. M., Arcese, P. & Keller, L. F. 2006 Intrinsic parent-offspring correlation in inbreeding level in a song sparrow (Melospiza melodia) population open to immigration. Am. Nat. 168, 1-13. (doi:10.1086/504852)
52. Reid, J. M., Arcese, P., Keller, L. F., Elliott, K. H., Sampson, L. & Hasselquist, D. 2007 Inbreeding effects on immune response in free-living song sparrows (Melospiza melodia). Proc. R. Soc. B 274, 697-706. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2006.0092)
53. Reinhold, K. 2002 Modelling the evolution of female choice strategies under inbreeding conditions. Genetica 116, 189-195. (doi:10.1023/A:1021253014088)
54. Rowe, L. & Houle, D. 1996 The lek paradox and the capture of genetic variance by condition dependence traits. Proc. R. Soc. B 263, 1415-1421. (doi:10.1098/rspb.1996.0207)
55. Searcy, W. A. 1984 Song repertoire size and female preferences in song sparrows. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 14, 281-286. (doi:10.1007/BF00299499)
56. Searcy, W. A. & Marler, P. 1981 A test for responsiveness to song structure and programming in female song sparrows. Science 213, 926-928. (doi:10.1126/science.213.4510.926)
57. Smith, J. N. M., Keller, L. F., Marr, A. B. & Arcese, P. 2006 Conservation and biology of small populations: the song sparrows of Mandarte Island. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
58. Tomkins, J. L., Radwan, J., Kotiaho, J. S. & Tregenza, T. 2004 Genic capture and resolving the lek paradox. Trends Ecol. Evol. 19, 323-328. (doi:10.1016/j.tree.2004.03.029)
59. Tregenza, T. & Wedell, N. 2000 Genetic compatibility, mate choice and patterns of parentage: invited review. Mol. Ecol. 9, 1013-1027. (doi:10.1046/j.1365-294x.2000.00964.x)
60. van Oosterhout, C., Trigg, R. E., Carvalho, G. R., Magurran, A. E., Hauser, L. & Shaw, P. W. 2003 Inbreeding depression and genetic load of sexually selected traits: how the guppy lost its spots. J. Evol. Biol. 16, 273-281. (doi:10.1046/j.1420-9101.2003.00511.x)
61. Widemo, F. & Sæther, 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. (doi:10.1016/S0169-5347(98)01531-6)