Positive genetic correlation between female preference and offspring fitness

Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

Volumn 269, Issue 1506, 2002, Pages 2215-2219

  Hine, Emma ^a   Lachish, Shelly ^a   Higgie, Megan ^a   Blows, Mark W ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

Author keywords

Female preference; Genetic correlation; Male genetic quality; Sexual selection

Indexed keywords

HYDROCARBON;

FITNESS; MATE CHOICE; NATURAL SELECTION; SEXUAL SELECTION;

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL TRAIT; DROSOPHILA; DROSOPHILA SERRATA; FEMALE; FITNESS; GENETIC CORRELATION; NATURAL SELECTION; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGENY; SEXUAL SELECTION;

ANIMALIA; DIPTERA; DROSOPHILA SERRATA; DROSOPHILIDAE;

EID: 41049088309     PISSN: 09628452     EISSN: 14712970     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2002.2149     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Aitchison, J. 1986 The Statistical Analysis of Compositional Data. London: Chapman & Hall.
2. Bakker, T. C. M. & Pomiankowski, A. 1995 The genetic basis of female mating preferences. J. Evol. Biol. 8, 129-171.
3. Blows, M. W. 2002 Interaction between natural and sexual selection during the evolution of mate recognition. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 269, 1113-1118. (DOI 10.1098/rspb.2002.2002.)
4. Blows, M. W. & Allan, R. A. 1998 Levels of mate recognition within and between two Drosophila species and their hybrids. Am. Nat. 152, 826-837.
5. Brodie III, E. D., Moore, A. J. & Janzen, F. J. 1995 Visualizing and quantifying natural selection. Trends Ecol. Evol. 10, 313-318.
6. Brooks, R. 2000 Negative genetic correlation between male sexual attractiveness and survival. Nature 406, 67-70.
7. Endler, J. A. 1986 Natural Selection in the Wild. Princeton University Press.
8. Etges, W. J. 1996 Sexual selection operating in a wild population of Drosophila robusta. Evolution 50, 2095-2100.
9. Fisher, R. A. 1930 The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection. Oxford: Clarendon.
10. 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.
11. Heisler, I. L. 1994 Quantitative genetic models of the evolution of mating behaviour. In Quantitative Genetic Studies of Behavioural Evolution (ed. C. R. B. Boake), pp. 101-125. University of Chicago Press.
12. Higgie, M., Chenoweth, S. & Blows, M. W. 2000 Natural selection and the reinforcement of mate recognition. Science 290, 519-521.
13. Hoikkala, A. & Crossley, S. 2000 Copulatory courtship in Drosophila: Behaviour and songs in D. birchii and D. serrata. J. Insect Behav. 13, 71-87.
14. Hoikkala, A., Crossley, S. & Castillo-Melendez, C. 2000 Copulatory courtship in Drosophila birchii and D. serrata, species recognition and sexual selection. J. Insect Behav. 13, 361-373.
15. Iwasa, Y., Pomiankowski, A. & Nee, S. 1991 The evolution of costly mate preferences. II. The 'Handicap' principle. Evolution 45, 1431-1442.
16. Kingsolver, J. G., Hoekstra, H. E., Hoekstra, J. M., Berrigan, D., Vignieri, S. N., Hill, C. E., Hoang, A., Gibert, P. & Beerli, P. 2001 The strength of phenotypic selection in natural populations. Am. Nat. 157, 245-261.
17. Kirkpatrick, M. 1987 Sexual selection by female choice in polygynous animals. A. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 18, 43-70.
18. Kirkpatrick, M. & Barton, N. H. 1997 The strength of indirect selection on female mating preferences. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 94, 1282-1286.
19. Kirkpatrick, M. & Ryan, M. J. 1991 The evolution of mating preferences and the paradox of the lek. Nature 350, 33-38.
20. Kokko, H., Brooks, R., McNamara, J. M. & Houston, A. I. 2002 The sexual selection continuum. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 269, 1331-1340. (DOI 10.1098/rspb.2002.2020.)
21. Lande, R. 1981 Models of speciation by sexual selection on polygenic traits. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 78, 3721-3725.
22. Lynch, M. & Walsh, J. 1998 The Genetics and Analysis of Quantitative Traits. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer.
23. Maynard Smith, J. 1991 Theories of sexual selection. Trends Ecol. Evol. 6, 146-151.
24. Møller, A. P. 1994 Male ornament size as a reliable cue to enhanced offspring viability in the barn swallow. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 91, 6929-6932.
25. Møller, A. P. & Alatalo, R. V. 1999 Good-genes effects in sexual selection. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 266, 85-91. (DOI 10.1098/rspb.1997.0607.)
26. Nelson, D. R. 1993 Methyl-branched lipids in insects. In Insect Lipids: Chemistry, Biochemistry and Biology (ed. D. W. Stanley-Samuelson & D. R. Nelson), pp. 271-315. Lincoln, NB: University of Nebraska Press.
27. Norris, K. 1993 Heritable variation in a plumage indicator of viability in male great tits Parus major. Nature 362, 537-539.
28. Petrie, M. 1994 Improved growth and survival of offspring of peacocks with more elaborate trains. Nature 371, 598-599.
29. Schluter, D. 1988 Estimating the form of natural selection on a quantitative trait. Evolution 42, 849-861.
30. Trivers, R. L. 1972 Parental investment and sexual selection. In Sexual Selection and the Descent of Man (ed. B. Campbell), pp. 136-179. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
31. Wedell, N. & Tregenza, T. 1999 Successful fathers sire successful sons. Evolution 53, 620-625.
32. Zahavi, A. 1975 Mate selection: A selection for a handicap. J. Theor. Biol. 53, 205-214.