Do genetic diversity effects drive the benefits associated with multiple mating? A test in a marine invertebrate

PLoS ONE

Volumn 4, Issue 8, 2009, Pages

  McLeod, Laura ^a   Marshall, Dustin J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL CELL; ARTICLE; ASSORTATIVE MATING; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; FERTILIZATION; GALEOLARIA CAESPITOSA; GENETIC COMPATIBILITY; GENETIC ENHANCEMENT; GENETIC TRAIT; GENETIC VARIABILITY; HATCHING; INVERTEBRATE; LARVAL STAGE; MALE; MARINE SPECIES; MATE CHOICE; MATING TYPE; NONHUMAN; PATERNITY; POLYANDRY; POLYCHAETA; PROGENY; SEXUAL BEHAVIOR; SPERM COMPETITION; ZYGOTE; ANIMAL; BIOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY;

INVERTEBRATA; POLYCHAETA;

ANIMALS; FEMALE; GENETIC VARIATION; MALE; MARINE BIOLOGY; POLYCHAETA; SEXUAL BEHAVIOR, ANIMAL;

EID: 68949151914     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0006347     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Birkhead TR, Möller AP (1998) Sperm competition and sexual selection. New York: Academic Press.
2. Simmons LW (2001) The evolution of polyandry: an examination of the genetic incompatibility and good-sperm hypotheses. Journal Evolutionary Biology 14: 585-594.
3. Zeh JA, Zeh DW (2001) Reproductive mode and the genetic benefits of polyandry. Animal Behaviour 61: 1051-1063.
4. Simmons LW (2005) The evolution of polyandry: Sperm competition, sperm selection and offspring viability. Annual Reviews of Ecology & Systematics 36: 125-146.
5. Jennions MD, Petrie M (2000) Why do females mate multiply? A review of the genetic benefits. Biological Reviews 75: 21-64.
6. Neff BD, Pitcher TE (2005) Genetic quality and sexual selection: an integrated framework for good genes and compatible genes. Molecular Ecology 14: 19-38.
7. Kokko H, Jennions MD, Brooks R (2006) Unifying and Testing Models of Sexual Selection. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 37: 43-66.
8. Birkhead TR, Moller AP, Sutherland WJ (1993) Why Do Females Make It So Difficult for Males to Fertilize Their Eggs. Journal of Theoretical Biology 161: 51-60.
9. Eberhard WG (1996) Female control: sexual selection by cryptic female choice. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press.
10. Neff BD, Pitcher TE (2005) Genetic quality and sexual selection: an integrated for good genes and compatible genes. Molecular Ecology 14: 19-38.
11. Bilde T, Maklakov AA, Schilling N (2007) Inbreeding avoidance in spiders: evidence for rescue effect in fecundity of female spiders with out breeding opportunity. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 20: 1237-1242.
12. Teng ZQ, Kang L (2007) Egg-hatching benefits gained by polyandrous female locusts are not due to the fertilization advantage of nonsibling males. Evolution 61: 470-476.
13. Zeh JA, Zeh DW (2006) Outbred embryos rescue inbred half-siblings in mixed-paternity broods of live-bearing females. Nature 439: 201-203.
14. Dunn PO, Lifjeld JT, Whittingham LA (2009) Multiple paternity and offspring quality in tree swallows. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 63: 911-922.
15. Yasui Y (1998) The 'genetic benefits' of female multiple mating reconsidered. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 13: 246-250.
16. Arnqvist G (1989) Multiple Mating in a Water Strider - Mutual Benefits or Intersexual Conflict. Animal Behaviour 38: 749-756.
17. Hughes AR, Inouye BD, Johnson MTJ, Underwood N, Vellend M (2008) Ecological consequences of genetic diversity. Ecology Letters 11: 609-623.
18. Oldroyd BP, Rinderer TE, Harbo JR, Buco SM (1992) Effects of Intracolonial Genetic Diversity on Honey-Bee (Hymenoptera, Apidae) Colony Performance. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 85: 335-343.
19. Ridley M (1993) Clutch Size and Mating Frequency in Parasitic Hymenoptera. American Naturalist 142: 893-910.
20. Loman J, Madsen T, Hakansson T (1988) Increased Fitness from Multiple Matings, and Genetic-Heterogeneity - a Model of a Possible Mechanism. Oikos 52: 69-72.
21. Cunningham EJA, Russell AF (2000) Egg investment is influenced by male attractiveness in the mallard. Nature 404: 74-77.
22. Evans JP, Zane L, Francescato S, Pilastro A (2003) Directional postcopulatory sexual selection revealed by artificial insemination. Nature 421: 360-363.
23. Ivy TM (2007) Good genes, genetic compatibility and the evolution of polyandry: use of the diallel cross to address competing hypotheses. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 20: 479-487.
24. Dziminski MA, Roberts JD, Simmons LW (2008) Fitness consequences of parental compatibility in the frog Crinia georgiana. Evolution 62: 879-886.
25. Bode M, Marshall DJ (2007) The quick and the dead? Sperm competition and sexual conflict in the sea. Evolution.
26. Marshall DJ, Evans JP (2005) The benefits of polyandry in the free-spawning polychaete Galeolaria caespitosa. J Evol Biol 18: 735-741.
27. Marsden JR, Anderson DT (1981) Larval development and metamorphosis of the serpulid polychaete Galeolaria caespitosa Lamark. Aust J Mar Freshwater Res 32: 667-680.
28. Marshall DJ, Evans JP (2005) Does egg competition occur in marine broadcast spawners? J Evol Biol 18: 1244-1252.
29. Marshall DJ, Evans JP (2007) Context dependent genetic benefits of polyandry in a marine hermaphrodite. Biology Letters 3: 685-688.
30. Quinn GP, Keough MJ (2002) Experimental design and data analysis for biologists. Cambridge, U. K.: Cambridge University Press. pp 537.
31. Evans JP, Marshall DJ (2005) Male x female interactions influence fertilisation success and mediate the benefits of polyandry in the sea urchin Heliocidaris erythrogramma. Evolution 59: 106-112.
32. Zeh JA, Zeh DW (2003) Toward a new sexual selection paradigm: Polyandry, conflict and incompatibility (Invited article). Ethology 109: 929-950.
33. Hughes WOH, Boomsma JJ (2004) Genetic diversity and disease resistance in leaf-cutting ant societies. Evolution 58: 1251-1260.
34. Mattila HR, Seeley TD (2007) Genetic diversity in honey bee colonies enhances productivity and fitness. Science 317: 362-364.
35. Griffiths SW, Armstrong JD (2001) The benefits of genetic diversity outweigh those of kin association in a territorial animal. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences 268: 1293-1296.
36. Barton NH, Post RJ (1986) Sibling Competition and the Advantage of Mixed Families. Journal of Theoretical Biology 120: 381-387.
37. Forsman A, Ahnesjo J, Caesar S (2007) Fitness benefits of diverse offspring in pygmy grasshoppers. Evolutionary Ecology Research 9: 1305-1318.
38. Manahan DT (1990) Adaptations by invertebrate larvae for nutrient acquisition from seawater. American Zoologist 30: 147-160.
39. Evans JP, Garcia-Gonzalez F, Marshall DJ (2007) Sources of genetic and phenotypic variation in sperm performance and larval traits in a sea urchin. Evolution 61: 2832-3838.
40. Marshall DJ, Bolton TF (2007) Effects of egg size on the development time of non-feeding larvae. Biological Bulletin 212: 6-11.
41. Marshall DJ (2002) In situ measures of spawning synchrony and fertilization success in an intertidal, free-spawning invertebrate. Marine Ecology Progress Series 236: 113-119.
42. Marshall DJ, Semmens D, Cook C (2004) Consequences of spawning at low tide: limited gamete dispersal for a rockpool anemone. Marine Ecology Progress Series 266: 135-142.
43. Castilla JC, Manriquez PH, Delgado AP, Gargallo L, Leiva A, et al. (2007) Biofoam enhances larval retention in a free-spawning marine tunicate. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 104: 18120-18122.
44. Simmons LW (2005) The evolution of polyandry: Sperm competition, sperm selection, and offspring viability. Annual Review of Ecology Evolution and Systematics 36: 125-146.
45. Klemme I, Ylonen H, Eccard JA (2008) Long-term fitness benefits of polyandry in a small mammal, the bank vole Clethrionomys glareolus. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 275: 1095-1100.
46. Pai A, Feil S, Yan G (2007) Variation in polyandry and its fitness consequences among populations of the red flour beetle, Tribolium castaneum. Evolutionary Ecology 21: 687-702.
47. Dunn DW, Sumner JP, Goulson D (2005) The benefits of multiple mating to female seaweed flies, Coelopa frigida (Diptera: Coelpidae). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 58: 128-135.
48. Maklakov AA, Lubin Y (2006) Indirect genetic benefits of polyandry in a spider with direct costs of mating. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 61: 31-38.
49. Tregenza T, Wedell N (1998) Benefits of multiple mates in the cricket Gryllus bimaculatus. Evolution 52: 1726-1730.
50. Zeh JA, Zeh DW (1997) The evolution of polyandry.2. Post-copulatory defences against genetic incompatibility. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B 264: 69-75.