Mate choice for non-additive genetic benefits: A resolution to the lek paradox

Journal of Theoretical Biology

Volumn 254, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 147-155

  Neff, Bryan D ^a   Pitcher, Trevor E ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN ONTARIO   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WINDSOR   (Canada)

Author keywords

Directional selection; Genetic quality; Heritability; Inbreeding; Mate choice; Overdominance; Sexual selection

Indexed keywords

DOMINANCE; ECOLOGICAL MODELING; FECUNDITY; FITNESS; GENE EXPRESSION; GENETIC DRIFT; GENETIC VARIATION; HERITABILITY; INBREEDING; LEK; MATE CHOICE; POPULATION SIZE; REPRODUCTIVE STRATEGY; SEXUAL SELECTION;

ALLELE; ARTICLE; BREEDING; FERTILITY; GENE LOCUS; GENETIC TRAIT; GENETIC VARIABILITY; GENOTYPE; HERITABILITY; HOMOZYGOSITY; INBREEDING; MATING; POPULATION SIZE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGENY;

ANIMALS; FEMALE; FERTILITY; GENETIC DRIFT; GENETIC VARIATION; GENOTYPE; INBREEDING; MALE; MATING PREFERENCE, ANIMAL; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; PHENOTYPE; POPULATION DYNAMICS; SOCIAL DOMINANCE;

EID: 48149084375     PISSN: 00225193     EISSN: 10958541     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2008.05.019     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Abzhanov A., Kuo W.P., Hartmann C., Grant B.R., Grant P.R., and Tabin C.J. The calmodulin pathway and evolution of elongated beak morphology in Darwin's finches. Nature 442 (2006) 563-567
2. Andersson M. Sexual Selection (1994), Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ
3. Bateson P.P.G. Mate Choice (1983), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
4. Bradbury J.W., Gibson R.M., Mccarthy C.E., and Vehrencamp S.L. Dispersion of displaying male sage grouse 2. The role of female dispersion. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 24 (1989) 15-24
5. Chenoweth S.F., and Blows M.W. Dissecting the complex genetic basis of mate choice. Nat. Rev. Genet. 7 (2006) 681-692
6. Crnokrak P., and Roff D.A. Inbreeding depression in the wild. Heredity 83 (1999) 260-270
7. Darwin C. The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex (1871), John Murray, London, UK
8. Drake J.W., Charlesworth B., Charlesworth D., and Crow D.F. Rates of spontaneous mutation. Genetics 148 (1998) 1667-1686
9. Falconer D.S., and Mackay T.F.C. Introduction to Quantitative Genetics (1996), Longman, London, UK
10. Fitzpatrick M.J. Pleiotropy and the genomic location of sexually selected genes. Am. Nat. 163 (2004) 800-808
11. Hoffman J.I., Forcada J., Trathan P.N., and Amos W. Female fur seals show active choice for males that are heterozygous and unrelated. Nature 445 (2007) 912-914
12. Höglund J., and Alatalo R.V. Leks (1995), Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ
13. Houle D. How should we explain variation in genetic variance traits?. Genetica 102 3 (1998) 241-253
14. Irwin A.J., and Taylor P.D. Heterozygous advantage and the evolution of female choice. Evol. Ecol. Res. 2 (2000) 119-128
15. Jennions M.D., Møller A.P., and Petrie M. Sexually selected traits and adult survival: a meta-analysis. Q. Rev. Biol. 76 (2001) 3-36
16. Keller L.F., Arcese P., Smith J.N.M., Hochachka W.H., and Stearns S.C. Selection against inbred song sparrows during a natural-population bottleneck. Nature 372 (1994) 356-357
17. Kirkpatrick M., and Barton N.H. The strength of indirect selection on female mating preferences. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 94 (1997) 282-1286
18. Kirkpatrick M., and Ryan M.J. The evolution of mating preferences and the paradox of the lek. Nature 350 (1991) 33-38
19. Kokko H., Brooks R., Jennions M.D., and Morley J. The evolution of mate choice and mating biases. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 270 (2003) 653-664
20. Kotiaho J.S., LeBas N.R., Puurtinen M., and Tomkins J.L. On the resolution of the lek paradox. Trends Ecol. Evol. 23 (2008) 1-3
21. Lehmann L., Keller L.F., and Kokko H. Mate choice evolution, dominance effects, and the maintenance of genetic variation. J. Theor. Biol. 244 (2007) 282-295
22. Lin Y.-J., Seroude L., and Benzer S. Extended life-span and stress resistance in the Drosophila mutant methuselah. Science 282 (1998) 943-946
23. Loiselle B.A., Ryder T.B., Duraes R., Tori W., Blake J.G., and Parker P.G. Kin selection does not explain male aggregation at leks of 4 manakin species. Behav. Ecol. 18 (2007) 287-291
24. Lynch M., Blanchard J., Houle D., Kibota T., Schultz S., Vassilieva L., and Willis J. Perspective: spontaneous deleterious mutation. Evolution 53 (1999) 645-663
25. Lynch M., and Walsh B. Genetics and Analysis of Quantitative traits (1998), Sinauer Associates Inc., Sunderland, MA
26. Mead L.S., and Arnold S.J. Quantitative genetic models of sexual selection. Trends Ecol. Evol. 19 (2004) 264-271
27. Miller C.W., and Moore A.J. A potential resolution to the lek paradox through indirect genetic effects. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 274 (2007) 1279-1286
28. Mitton J.B., Schuster W.S.F., Cothran E.G., and Defries J.C. Correlation between the individual heterozygosity of parents and their offspring. Heredity 71 (1993) 59-63
29. Møller A.P., and Alatalo R.V. Good-genes effects in sexual selection. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 266 (1999) 85-91
30. Møller A.P., and Jennions M.D. How important are direct fitness benefits of sexual selection?. Naturwissenschaften 88 (2001) 401-415
31. Nadeau N.J., Burke T., and Mundy N.I. Evolution of an avian pigmentation gene correlates with a measure of sexual selection. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 274 (2007) 1807-1813
32. Neff B.D., and Pitcher T.E. Genetic quality and sexual selection: an integrated framework for good genes and compatible genes. Mol. Ecol. 14 (2005) 19-38
33. O'Connor K.D., Marr A.B., Arcese P., Keller L.F., Jeffery K.J., and Bruford M.W. Extra-pair fertilization and effective population size in the song sparrow Melospiza melodia. J. Avian Biol. 37 (2006) 572-578
34. Petrie M., and Roberts G. Sexual selection and the evolution of evolvability. Heredity 98 (2007) 198-205
35. Pomiankowski A., and Møller A.P. A resolution of the lek paradox. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 260 (1995) 21-29
36. Reid J.M. Secondary sexual ornamentation and non-additive genetic benefits of female mate choice. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 274 (2007) 1395-1402
37. Reid J.M., Arcese P., Cassidy A.L.E.V., Hiebert S.M., Smith J.N.M., Stoddard P.K., and Marr A.B. Song repertoire size predicts initial mating success in male song sparrows, Melospiza melodia. Anim. Behav. 68 (2004) 1055-1063
38. Reid J.M., Arcese P., Cassidy A.L.E.V., Marr A.B., Smith J.N.M., and Keller L.F. Hamilton and Zuk meet heterozygosity? Song repertoire size indicates inbreeding and immunity in song sparrows (Melospiza melodia). Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 272 (2005) 481-487
39. Reid J.M., Arcese P., and Keller L.F. Intrinsic parent-offspring correlation in inbreeding level in a song sparrow (Melospiza melodia) population open to immigration. Am. Nat. 168 (2006) 1-13
40. Reynolds J.D., and Gross M.R. Costs and benefits of female mate choice: is there a lek paradox?. Am. Nat. 136 (1990) 230-243
41. Rowe L., and Houle D. The lek paradox and the capture of genetic variance by condition dependent traits. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 263 (1996) 1415-1421
42. Ryan M.J., Tuttle M.D., and Taft L.K. The costs and benefits of frog chorusing behavior. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 8 (1981) 273-278
43. Shelly T.E. Lek size and female visitation in two species of tephritid fruit flies. Anim. Behav. 62 (2001) 33-40
44. Shriver M.D., Jin L., Chakraborty R., and Boerwinkle E. Vntr allele frequency-distributions under the stepwise mutation model-a computer-simulation approach. Genetics 134 (1993) 983-993
45. Smith J.N.M., Keller L.F., Marr A.B., and Arcese P. Conservation and Biology of Small Populations: The Song Sparrows of Mandarte Island (2006), Oxford University Press, New York
46. Tatsuta H., and Takano-Shimizu T. Genetic architecture of variation in sex-comb tooth number in Drosophila simulans. Genet. Res. Camb. 87 (2006) 93-107
47. Taylor P.D., and Williams G.C. The lek paradox is not resolved. Theor. Pop. Biol. 22 (1982) 392-409
48. Tomkins J.L., Radwan J., Kotiaho J.S., and Tregenza T. Genic capture and resolving the lek paradox. Trends Ecol. Evol. 19 (2004) 323-328
49. Trail P.W. Predation and antipredator behavior at guianan cock-of-the-rock leks. Auk 104 (1987) 496-507
50. Van Buskirk J., and Willi Y. The change in quantitative genetic variation with inbreeding. Evolution 60 (2006) 2428-2434
51. Vassilieva L.L., Hook A.M., and Lynch M. The fitness effects of spontaneous mutations in Caenorhabditis elegans. Evolution 54 (2000) 1234-1246
52. Willis J.H., and Orr H.A. Increased heritable variation following population bottlenecks: the role of dominance. Evolution 47 (1993) 949-957