Heterozygosity-based assortative mating in blue tits (Cyanistes caeruleus): Implications for the evolution of mate choice

Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

Volumn 276, Issue 1669, 2009, Pages 2931-2940

  García Navas, Vicente ^a   Ortego, Joaquín ^b   Sanz, Juan José ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CASTILLA LA MANCHA   (Spain)

^b MUSEO NACIONAL DE CIENCIAS NATURALES   (Spain)

Author keywords

Assortative mating; Blue tit; Genetic diversity; Heterozygosity; Relatedness

Indexed keywords

ASSORTATIVE MATING; BIRD; BROOD REARING; EGG PRODUCTION; EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY; GENETIC VARIATION; MATE CHOICE; RELATEDNESS; RESIDENT POPULATION; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR;

ANIMAL BEHAVIOR; ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ARTICLE; ASSORTATIVE MATING; BIRD; CYANISTES CAERULEUS; EGG PRODUCTION; EVOLUTION; FEEDING; FEMALE; GENETIC TRAIT; HETEROZYGOSITY; MALE; MATE CHOICE; MONOGAMY; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGENY; REARING; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR;

AVES; CYANISTES CAERULEUS;

EID: 68249124020     PISSN: 09628452     EISSN: 14712970     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2009.0417     Document Type: Article

References (70)

1. Acevedo-Whitehouse, K., Gulland, F., Greig, D. & Amos, W. 2003 Disease susceptibility in California sea lions. Nature 422, 35. (doi:10.1038/422035a)
2. Andersson, M. 1994 Sexual selection. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
3. Andersson, S., Örnborg, J. & Andersson, M. 1998 Ultraviolet sexual dimorphism and assortative mating in blue tits. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 265, 445-450. (doi:10.1098/rspb.1998.0315)
4. Aparicio, J. M., Cordero, P. J. & Veiga, J. P. 2001 A test of the hypothesis of mate choice based on heterozygosity in the spotless starling. Anim. Behav. 62, 1001-1006. (doi:10.1006/anbe.2001.1840)
5. Aparicio, J. M., Ortego, J. & Cordero, P. J. 2006 What should we weigh to estimate heterozygosity, alleles or loci? Mol. Ecol. 15, 4659-4665. (doi:10.1111/j.1365-294X.2006.03111.x)
6. Balloux, F., Amos, W. & Coulson, T. 2004 Does heterozygosity estimate inbreeding in real populations? Mol. Ecol. 13, 3021-3031. (doi:10.1111/j.1365-294X.2004.02318.x)
7. Bonneaud, C., Chastel, O., Federici, P., Westerdahl, H. & Sorci, G. 2006 Complex Mhc-based mate choice in a wild passerine. Proc. R. Soc. B 273, 1111-1116. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2005.3325)
8. Brown, J. L. 1997 A theory of mate choice based on heterozygosity. Behav. Ecol. 8, 60-65. (doi:10.1093/beheco/8.1.60)
9. Charlesworth, B. & Charlesworth, D. 1999 The genetic basis of inbreeding depression. Genet. Res. Camb. 74, 329-340. (doi:10.1017/S0016672399004152)
10. Clutton-Brock, T. 2009 Sexual selection in females. Anim. Behav. 77, 3-11. (doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2008.08.026)
11. 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.
12. Coltman, D. W. & Slate, J. 2003 Microsatellite measures of inbreeding: a meta-analysis. Evolution 57, 971-983.
13. Cuthill, I. C., Partridge, J. C., Bennett, A. T. D., Church, S. C., Hart, N. S. & Hunt, S. 2000 Ultraviolet vision in birds. Adv. Stud. Behav. 29, 159-214. (doi:10.1016/S0065-3454(08)60105-9)
14. Falconer, D. S. & Mackay, T. F. C. 1996 Introduction to quantitative genetics. London, UK: Longman.
15. Ferrer, M. & Penteriani, V. 2003 A process of pair formation leading to assortative mating: passive age-assortative mating by habitat heterogeneity. Anim. Behav. 66, 137-143. (doi:10.1006/anbe.2003.2158)
16. 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)
17. Foerster, K., Valcu, M., Johnsen, A. & Kempenaers, B. 2006 A spatial genetic structure and effects of relatedness on mate choice in a wild bird population. Mol. Ecol. 15, 4555-4567. (doi:10.1111/j.1365-294X. 2006.03091.x)
18. Frasier, T. R. 2008 STORM: software for testing hypothesis of relatedness and mating patterns. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 8, 1263-1266.
19. Fromhage, L., Kokko, H. & Reid, J. M. 2008 Evolution of mate choice for genome-wide heterozygosity. Evolution 63, 684-694. (doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.2008.00575.x)
20. Gosler, A. G., Barnett, P. R. & Reynolds, S. J. 2000 Inheritance and variation in eggshell patterning in the great tit Parus major. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 267, 2469-2473. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2000.1307)
21. 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)
22. Hansson, B., Jack, L., Christians, J. K., Pemberton, J. M., Akesson, M., Westerdahl, H., Bensch, S. & Hasselquist, D. 2007 No evidence for inbreeding avoidance in a great reed warbler population. Behav. Ecol. 18, 157-164. (doi:10.1093/beheco/arl062)
23. Hawley, D. M., Sydenstricker, K. V., Kollias, G. V. & Dhondt, A. A. 2005 Genetic diversity predicts pathogen resistance and cell-mediated immunocompetence in house finches. Biol. Lett. 1, 326-329. (doi:10.1098/rsbl.2005.0303)
24. Hoffman, J. I., Forcada, J., Trathan, P. N. & Amos, W. 2007 Female fur seals show active choice for males that are heterozygous and unrelated. Nature 445, 912-914. (doi:10.1038/nature05558)
25. Hunt, S., Bennett, A. T. D., Cuthill, I. C. & Griffiths, R. 1998 Blue tits are ultraviolet tits. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 265, 451-455. (doi:10.1098/rspb.1998.0316)
26. Hunt, S., Cuthill, I. C., Bennet, A. T. D. & Griffiths, R. 1999 Preferences for ultraviolet partners in the blue tit. Anim. Behav. 58, 809-815. (doi:10.1006/anbe.1999.1214)
27. Johnsen, A., Delhey, K., Schlicht, E., Peters, A. & Kempenaers, B. 2005 Male sexual attractiveness and parental effort in blue tits: test of the differential allocation hypothesis. Anim. Behav. 70, 877-888. (doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2005.01.005)
28. Keller, L. F. & Arcese, P. 1998 No evidence for inbreeding avoidance in a natural population of song sparrows (Melospiza melodia). Am. Nat. 152, 380-392. (doi:10.1086/286176)
29. Kempenaers, B. 2007 Mate choice and genetic quality: a review of the heterozygosity theory. Adv. Stud. Behav. 37, 189-278. (doi:10.1016/S0065-3454(07)37005-8)
30. Kirkpatrick, M. & Ryan, M. 1991 The evolution of mating preferences and the paradox of the lek. Nature 350, 33-39. (doi:10.1038/350033a0)
31. Kotiaho, J. S., LeBas, N. R., Puurtinen, M. & Tomkins, J. L. 2008 On the resolution of the lek paradox. Trends Ecol. Evol. 23, 1-3. (doi:10.1016/j.tree.2007.09.012)
32. Kruuk, L. E. B., Sheldon, B. C. & Merilä, J. 2002 Severe inbreeding depression in collared flycatchers (Ficedula albicollis). Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 269, 1581-1589. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2002.2049)
33. Li, C. C., Weeks, D. E. & Chakravarti, A. 1993 Similarity of DNA fingerprints due to chance and relatedness. Hum. Hered. 43, 45-52. (doi:10.1159/000154113)
34. Marshall, R. C., Buchanan, K. L. & Catchpole, C. K. 2003 Sexual selection and individual genetic diversity in a songbird. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 270, 248-250. (doi:10.1098/rsbl.2003.0081)
35. 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)
36. Mitton, J. B., Schuster, W. S. F., Cothran, E. G. & deFries, J. C. 1993 Correlation between the individual heterozygosity of parents and their offspring. Heredity 71, 59-63. (doi:10.1038/hdy.1993.107)
37. 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.1999.0607)
38. 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)
39. Neff, B. D. & Pitcher, T. E. 2008 Mate choice for non-additive genetic benefits: a resolution to the lek paradox. J. Theor. Biol. 254, 147-155. (doi:10.1016/j.jtbi.2008.05.019)
40. Ortego, J., Calabuig, G., Cordero, P. J. & Aparicio, J. M. 2007a Egg production and individual genetic diversity in lesser kestrels. Mol. Ecol. 16, 2383-2392. (doi:10.1111/j.1365-294X.2007.03322.x)
41. Ortego, J., Aparicio, J. M., Calabuig, G. & Cordero, P. J. 2007b Risk of ectoparasitism and genetic diversity in a wild lesser kestrel population. Mol. Ecol. 16, 3712-3720. (doi:10.1111/j.1365- 294X.2007.03406.x)
42. Ortego, J., Calabuig, G., Aparicio, J. M. & Cordero, P. J. 2008a Genetic consequences of natal dispersal in the colonial lesser kestrel. Mol. Ecol. 17, 2051-2059. (doi:10.1111/j.1365-294X.2008. 03719.x)
43. Ortego, J., Aparicio, J. M., Cordero, P. J. & Calabuig, G. 2008b Individual genetic diversity correlates with the size and spatial isolation of natal colonies in a bird meta-population. Proc. R. Soc. B 275, 2039-2047. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2008.0475)
44. Pemberton, J. 2004 Measuring inbreeding depression in the wild: the old ways are the best. Trends Ecol. Evol. 19, 613-615. (doi:10.1016/j.tree.2004.09.010)
45. Pritchard, J. K., Stephens, M. & Donnelly, P. 2000 Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 155, 945-959.
46. Reid, J. M. 2007 Secondary sexual ornamentation and non-additive genetic benefits of female mate choice. Proc. R. Soc. B 274, 1395-1402. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2007.0063)
47. Reid, J. M., Arcese, P., Cassidy, A. E., Marr, A. B., Smith, J. M. & Keller, L. F. 2005 Hamilton and Zukmeet heterozygosity? Song repertoire size indicates inbreeding and immunity in song sparrows (Melospiza melodia). Proc. R. Soc. B 272, 481-487. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2004.2983)
48. Reusch, T. B. H., Häberli, M. A., Aeschlimann, P. B. & Milinski, M. 2001 Female sticklebacks count alleles in a strategy of sexual selection explaining MHC polymorphism. Nature 414, 300-302. (doi:10.1038/35104547)
49. Roberts, S. C. & Gosling, L. M. 2003 Genetic similarity and quality interact in mate choice decisions by female mice. Nat. Genet. 35, 103-106. (doi:10.1038/ng1231)
50. Roberts, S. C., Hale, M. L. & Petrie, M. 2006 Correlations between heterozygosity and measures of genetic similarity: implications for understanding mate choice. J. Evol. Biol. 19, 558-569. (doi:10.1111/j.1420-9101.2005.01003.x)
51. Sanz, J. J. & García-Navas, V. 2009 Eggshell pigmentation pattern in relation to breeding performance of blue tits Cyanistes caeruleus. J. Anim. Ecol. 78, 31-41. (doi:10.1111/j.1365-2656.2008.01465.x)
52. SAS Institute 2004 SAS/STAT 9.1 user's guide. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.
53. Scribner, K. T., Smith, M. H. & Johns, P. E. 1989 Environmental and genetic components of antler growth in white-tailed deer. J. Mammal. 70, 284-291. (doi:10.2307/1381509)
54. Seddon, N., Amos, W., Mulder, R. A. & Tobias, J. A. 2004 Male heterozygosity predicts territory size, song structure and reproductive success in a cooperatively breeding bird. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 271, 1823-1829. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2004.2805)
55. Slate, J. & Pemberton, J. M. 2006 Does reduced heterozygosity depress sperm quality in wild rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus)? Curr. Biol. 16, 790-791. (doi:10.1016/j.cub.2006.08.047)
56. Slate, J., David, P., Dodds, K. G., Broad, T. E. & McEwan, J. C. 2004 Understanding the relationship between the inbreeding coefficient and multilocus heterozygosity: theoretical expectations and empirical data. Heredity 93, 255-265. (doi:10.1038/sj.hdy.6800485)
57. Svensson, L. 1992 Identification guide to European passerines. Stockholm, Sweden: L. Svensson.
58. Szulkin, M. & Sheldon, B. C. 2008 Dispersal as a means of inbreeding avoidance in a wild bird population. Proc. R. Soc. B 275, 703-711. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2007.0989)
59. Tomiuk, J., Stauss, M., Segelbacher, G., Fietz, J., Kömpf, J. & Bachmann, L. 2006 Female genetic heterogeneity affects the reproduction of great tits (Parus major L., 1758) in low-quality woodlands. J. Zool. Syst. Evol. Res. 45, 144-150. (doi:10.1111/j.1439-0469.2006.00382.x)
60. Trivers, R. L. 1972 Parental investment and sexual selection. In Sexual selection and the descent of man, 1871-1971 (ed. B. Campbell), pp. 136-179. Chicago, IL: Aldine Press.
61. Van de Casteele, T. & Matthysen, E. 2006 Natal dispersal and parental escorting predict relatedness between mates in a passerine bird. Mol. Ecol. 15, 2557-2565. (doi:10.1111/j.1365-294X.2006.02946.x)
62. Van de Casteele, T., Galbusera, P. & Matthysen, E. 2001 A comparison of microsatellite-based pairwise relatedness estimators. Mol. Ecol. 10, 1539-1549. (doi:10.1046/j.1365-294X.2001.01288.x)
63. Van de Casteele, T., Galbusera, P., Schenck, T. & Matthysen, E. 2003 Seasonal and lifetime reproductive consequences of inbreeding in the great tit Parus major. Behav. Ecol. 14, 165-174. (doi:10.1093/beheco/14.2. 165)
64. Van Oosterhout, C., Trigg, R. E., Carvalho, G. R., Magurran, A. E. & Hauser, L. 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)
65. Van Tienderen, P. H. & Van Noordwijk, A. J. 1988 Dispersal, kinship and inbreeding in an island population of the great tit. J. Evol. Biol. 1, 117-137. (doi:10.1046/j.1420-9101.1988.1020117.x)
66. Weatherhead, P. J., Dufour, K. W., Lougheed, S. C. & Eckert, S. G. 1999 A test of the good-genes-as-heterozygosity hypothesis using red-winged blackbirds. Behav. Ecol. 10, 619-625. (doi:10.1093/beheco/10.6. 619)
67. Weir, B. S. 1996 Genetic data analysis II. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.
68. Wheelwright, N. T., Freeman-Gallant, C. R. & Mauck, R. A. 2006 Asymmetrical incest avoidance in the choice of social and genetic mates. Anim. Behav. 71, 631-639. (doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2005.06.012)
69. Zeh, J. A. & Zeh, D. W. 1996 The evolution of polyandry. 1. Intragenomic conflict and genetic incompatibility. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 263, 1711-1717. (doi:10.1098/rspb.1996.0250)
70. Zeh, J. A. & Zeh, D. W. 1997 The evolution of polyandry. 2. Post-copulatory defences against genetic incompatibility. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 264, 69-75. (doi:10.1098/rspb.1997.0010)