Genetic analysis of female preference functions as function-valued traits

American Naturalist

Volumn 172, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 194-202

  McGuigan, Katrina ^a   Van Homrigh, Anna ^a   Blows, Mark W ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

Author keywords

Drosophila bunnanda; Genetic covariance function; Mate choice; Random regression; Random coefficient models; Sexual selection

Indexed keywords

EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; FEMALE BEHAVIOR; FLY; GENETIC ANALYSIS; GENETIC VARIATION; MATE CHOICE; PHEROMONE; PREFERENCE BEHAVIOR; SEXUAL SELECTION;

DROSOPHILA CF. SERRATA MS-2004;

HYDROCARBON; SEX PHEROMONE;

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; DROSOPHILA; FEMALE; GENETIC SELECTION; GENETIC VARIABILITY; GENETICS; MALE; MATE CHOICE; METABOLISM; PHYSIOLOGY;

ANIMALS; DROSOPHILA; FEMALE; HYDROCARBONS; MALE; MATING PREFERENCE, ANIMAL; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; SELECTION (GENETICS); SEX ATTRACTANTS; VARIATION (GENETICS);

EID: 49849093744     PISSN: 00030147     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1086/588075     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Bakker, T. C. M., and A. Pomiankowski. 1995. The genetic basis of female mate preferences. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 8:129-171.
2. Barton, N. H., and M. Turelli. 1987. Adaptive landscapes, genetic distance and the evolution of quantitative characters. Genetical Research 49:157-173.
3. Blows, M. W., S. F. Chenoweth, and E. Hine. 2004. Orientation of the genetic variance-covariance matrix and the fitness surface for multiple male sexually selected traits. American Naturalist 163:329-340.
4. Brooks, R., and V. Couldridge. 1999. Multiple sexual ornaments co-evolve with multiple mating preferences. American Naturalist 154:37-45.
5. Brooks, R., and J. A. Endler. 2001a. Direct and indirect sexual selection and quantitative genetics of male traits in guppies (Poecilia reticulata). Evolution 55:1002-1015.
6. _. 2001b. Female guppies agree to differ: phenotypic and genetic variation in mate-choice behavior and the consequences for sexual selection. Evolution 55:1644-1655.
7. Bulmer, M. G. 1971. The effect of selection on genetic variability. American Naturalist 105:201-211.
8. Candolin, U. 2003. The use of multiple cues in mate choice. Biological Reviews 78:575-595.
9. Chenoweth, S. F., and M. W. Blows. 2005. Contrasting mutual sexual selection on homologous signal traits in Drosophila serrata. American Naturalist 165:281-289.
10. _. 2006. Dissecting the complex genetic basis of mate choice. Nature Reviews Genetics 7:681-692.
11. Chenoweth, S. F., D. Petfield, P. Doughty, and M. W. Blows. 2007. Male choice generates stabilising sexual selection on a female fecundity correlate. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 20:1745-1750.
12. Chenoweth, S. F., H. D. Rundle, and M. W. Blows. 2008. Genetic constraints and the evolution of display trait sexual dimorphism by natural and sexual selection. American Naturalist 171:22-34.
13. Coleman, S. W., G. L. Patricelli, and G. Borgia. 2004. Variable female preferences drive complex male displays. Nature 428:742-745.
14. de Jong, G. 1990. Quantitative genetics of reaction norms. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 3:447-468.
15. Gomulkiewicz, R., and M. Kirkpatrick. 1992. Quantitative genetics and the evolution of reaction norms. Evolution 46:390-411.
16. Hine, E., and M. W. Blows. 2006. Determining the effective dimensionality of the genetic variance-covariance matrix. Genetics 173:1135-1144.
17. Hine, E., S. Lachish, M. Higgie, and M. W. Blows. 2002. Positive genetic correlation between female preference and offspring fitness. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 269:2215-2219.
18. Hunt, J., R. Brooks, and M. D. Jennions. 2005. Female mate choice as a condition-dependent life-history trait. American Naturalist 166:79-92.
19. Jennions, M. D., and M. Petrie. 1997. Variation in mate choice and mating preferences: a review of causes and consequences. Biological Reviews 72:283-327.
20. Kingsolver, J. G., H. E. Hoekstra, J. M. Hoekstra, D. Berrigan, S. N. Vignieri, C. E. Hill, A. Hoang, P. Gibert, and P. Beerli. 2001a. The strength of phenotypic selection in natural populations. American Naturalist 157:245-261.
21. Kingsolver, J. G., R. Gomulkiewicz, and P. A. Carter. 2001b. Variation, selection and evolution of function-valued traits. Genetica 112:87-104.
22. Kingsolver, J. G., G. J. Ragland, and J. G. Shlichta. 2004. Quantitative genetics of continuous reaction norms: thermal sensitivity of caterpillar growth rates. Evolution 58:1521-1529.
23. Kirkpatrick, M. 1996. Good genes and direct selection in evolution of mating preferences. Evolution 50:2125-2140.
24. Kirkpatrick, M., and N. Heckman. 1989. A quantitative genetic model for growth, shape, reaction norms, and other infinite-dimensional characters. Journal of Mathematical Biology 27:429-450.
25. Kirkpatrick, M., and K. Meyer. 2004. Direct estimation of genetic principal components: simplified analysis of complex phenotypes. Genetics 168:2295-2306.
26. Kokko, H. 1997. The lekking game: can female choice explain aggregated male displays? Journal of Theoretical Biology 187:57-64.
27. Kokko, H., M. D. Jennions, and R. Brooks. 2006. Unifying and testing models of sexual selection. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 37:43-66.
28. Lande, R. 1980. The genetic covariances between characters maintained by pleiotropic mutations. Genetics 94:203-215.
29. Lande, R., and S. J. Arnold. 1983. The measurement of selection on correlated characters. Evolution 37:110-126.
30. Longford, N. T. 1993. Random coefficient models. Clarendon, Oxford.
31. Meyer, K. 1991. Estimating variances and covariances for multivariate animal models by restricted maximum likelihood. Genetics Selection Evolution 23:67-83.
32. Meyer, K., and M. Kirkpatrick. 2005. Up hill, down dale: quantitative genetics of curvaceous traits. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 360:1443-1455.
33. Partridge, L., A. Hoffmann, and J. S. Jones. 1987. Male size and mating success in Drosophila melanogaster and D. pseudoobscura under field conditions. Animal Behaviour 35:468-476.
34. Reeve, J. P. 2000. Predicting long-term response to selection. Genetical Research 75:83-94.
35. Ritchie, M. G. 1996. The shape of female mating preferences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 93:14628-14631.
36. _. 2000. The inheritance of female preference functions in a mate recognition system. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 267:327-332.
37. Ritchie, M. G., M. Saarikettu, and A. Hoikkala. 2005. Variation, but no covariance, in female preference functions and male song in a natural population of Drosophila montana. Animal Behaviour 70:849-854.
38. Schiffer, M., and S. F. McEvey. 2006. Drosophila bunnanda: a new species from northern Australia with notes on other Australian members of the montium subgroup (Diptera: Drosophilidae). Zootaxa 1333:1-23.
39. Turelli, M. 1984. Heritable genetic variation via mutation selection balance: Lerch's zeta meets the abdominal bristle. Theoretical Population Biology 25:138-193.
40. Van Homrigh, A., M. Higgie, K. McGuigan, and M. W. Blows. 2007. The depletion of genetic variance by sexual selection. Current Biology 17:528-532.
41. Wagner, W. E. 1998. Measuring female mating preferences. Animal Behaviour 55:1029-1042.
42. Wilson, A. J., L. E. B. Kruuk, and D. W. Coltman. 2005. Ontogenetic patterns in heritable variation for body size: using random regression models in a wild ungulate population. American Naturalist 166:E177-E192.