Condition-dependence, genotype-by-environment interactions and the lek paradox

Genetica

Volumn 132, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 209-216

  Kokko, Hanna ^a,b   Heubel, Katja ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI   (Finland)

^b AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Condition dependence; Female choice; Genotype by environment interaction; Lek paradox; Migration

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; ENVIRONMENT; FEMALE; GENETIC VARIABILITY; GENOTYPE; MALE; MATE CHOICE; MUTATION; PHYSIOLOGY;

ANIMALS; ENVIRONMENT; FEMALE; GENOTYPE; MALE; MATING PREFERENCE, ANIMAL; MODELS, GENETIC; MUTATION; VARIATION (GENETICS);

EID: 36649036315     PISSN: 00166707     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10709-007-9166-1     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Byers JA, Waits L (2006) Good genes sexual selection in nature. Proc Natl Acad Sci 103:16343-16345
2. Collins RD, Jang Y, Reinhold K, Greenfield MD (1999) Quantitative genetics of ultrasonic advertisement signalling in the lesser waxmoth Achroia grisella (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae). Heredity 83:644-651
3. Cotton S, Small J, Pomiankowski A (2006) Sexual selection and condition-dependent mate preferences. Curr Biol 16:R755-R765
4. Danielson-François AM, Kelly JK, Greenfield MD (2006) Genotype x environment interaction for male attractiveness in an acoustic moth: evidence for plasticity and canalization. J Evol Biol 19:532-542
5. David P, Björksten T, Fowler K, Pomiankowski A (2000) Condition-dependent signalling of genetic variation in stalk-eyes flies. Nature 406:186-188
6. Day T (2000) Sexual selection and the evolution of costly female preferences: spatial effects. Evolution 54:715-730
7. Ellner S, Hairston NG (1994) Role of overlapping generations in maintaining genetic variation in a fluctuating environment. Am Nat 143:403-417
8. Gillespie JH, Turelli M (1989) Genotype-environment interactions and the maintenance of polygenic variation. Genetics 10:253-280
9. Greenfield MD, Rodriguez RL (2004) Genotype-environment interaction and the reliability of mating signals. Anim Behav 68:1461-1468
10. Griffith SC, Owens IPF, Burke T (1999) Environmental determination of a sexually selected trait. Nature 400:358-360
11. Hine E, Chenoweth SF, Blows MW (2004) Multivariate quantitative genetics and the lek paradox: genetic variance in male sexually selected traits of Drosophila serrata under field conditions. Evolution 58:2754-2762
12. Hughes KA, Rodd FH, Reznick DN (2005) Genetic and environmental effects on secondary sex traits in guppies (Poecilia reticulata). J Evol Biol 18:35-45
13. Hunt J, Bussiere LF, Jennions MD, Brooks R (2004) What is genetic quality? Trends Ecol Evol 19:329-333
14. Jia FY, Greenfield MD, Collins RD (2000) Genetic variance of sexually selected traits in waxmoths: maintenance by genotype x environment interaction. Evolution 54:953-967
15. Kirkpatrick M, Ryan MJ (1991) The evolution of mating preferences and the paradox of the lek. Nature 350:33-38
16. Kokko H, Brooks R, McNamara JM, Houston AI (2002) The sexual selection continuum. Proc R Soc Lond B 269:1331-1340
17. Kokko H, Jennions MD, Brooks R (2006) Unifying and testing models of sexual selection. Ann Rev Ecol Evol Syst 37:43-66
18. Kokko H, Jennions MD, Houde A (2007) Evolution of frequency-dependent mate choice: keeping up with fashion trends. Proc R Soc Lond B 274:1317-1324
19. Lindström J (1999) Early development and fitness in birds and mammals. Trends Ecol Evol 14:343-348
20. Lindström J, Kokko H (2002) Cohort effects and population dynamics. Ecol Lett 5:338-344
21. McLain DK (2005) Female soldier beetles display a flexible preference for selectively favored male phenotypes. Evolution 59:1085-1095
22. Mills SC, Alatalo RV, Koskela E, Mappes J, Mappes T, Oksanen TA (2007) Signal reliability compromised by genotype by environment interaction is preserved by ontogenetic conflict. Evolution 61:1748-1757
23. Pomiankowski A, Iwasa Y, Nee S (1991) The evolution of costly mate preferences. 1. Fisher and biased mutation. Evolution 45:1422-1430
24. Proulx SR (2001) Female choice via indicator traits easily evolves in the face of recombination and migration. Evolution 55:2401-2411
25. Qvarnström A (1999) Genotype-by-environment interactions in the determination of the size of a secondary sexual character in the collared flycatcher (Ficedula albicollis). Evolution 53:1564-1572
26. Qvarnström A, Brommer JE, Gustafsson L (2006) Testing the genetics underlying the co-evolution of mate choice and ornament in the wild. Nature 441:84-86
27. Reinhold K (2004) Modeling a version of the good-genes hypothesis: female choice of locally adapted males. Org Divers Evol 4:157-163
28. Rodriguez RL, Greenfield MD (2003) Genetic variance and phenotypic plasticity in a component of female mate choice in an ultrasonic moth. Evolution 57:1304-1313
29. Rowe L, Houle D (1996) The lek paradox and the capture of genetic variance by condition dependent traits. Proc R Soc Lond B 263:1415-1421
30. Spichtig M, Kawecki TJ (2004) The maintenance (or not) of polygenic variation by soft selection in heterogeneous environments. Am Nat 164:70-84
31. Tomkins JL, Radwan J, Kotiaho JS, Tregenza T (2004) Genic capture and resolving the lek paradox. Trends Ecol Evol 19:323-328
32. Turelli M, Barton NH (2004) Polygenic variation maintained by balancing selection: Pleiotropy, sex-dependent allelic effects and GxE interactions. Genetics 166:1053-1079
33. Zhang X-S (2006) The phenotypic variance within plastic traits under migration-mutation-selection balance. Evolution 60:1125-1136