Experimental evidence for the evolution of indirect genetic effects: changes in the interaction effect coefficient, psi (ψ), due to sexual selection

Evolution

Volumn 64, Issue 6, 2010, Pages 1849-1856

  Chenoweth, Stephen F ^a   Rundle, Howard D ^a   Blows, Mark W ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

Author keywords

Cuticular hydrocarbons; Drosophila serrata; Experimental evolution; Interaction effect coefficient; Natural selection; Sexual selection

Indexed keywords

HYDROCARBON; SEX PHEROMONE;

ADAPTATION; BIOCHEMICAL COMPOSITION; CUTICLE; EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY; FLY; GENETIC VARIATION; GENOTYPE; HYDROCARBON; LIFE HISTORY TRAIT; REACTION NORM; SEXUAL SELECTION;

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; DROSOPHILA; ENVIRONMENT; EVOLUTION; FEMALE; GENETIC SELECTION; GENETICS; MALE; METABOLISM; SEXUAL DEVELOPMENT; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR;

ANIMALS; DROSOPHILA; ENVIRONMENT; EVOLUTION; FEMALE; HYDROCARBONS; MALE; SELECTION, GENETIC; SEX ATTRACTANTS; SEX CHARACTERISTICS; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION;

DROSOPHILA SERRATA;

EID: 77953892737     PISSN: 00143820     EISSN: 15585646     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2010.00952.x     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Atchison J. The statistical analysis of compositional data 1986, Chapman and Hall, London
2. Baayen R H. LanguageR: data sets and functions with " analyzing linguistic data: a practical introduction to statistics." R package version 0.953. 2008
3. Baayen R H, Davidson D J, Bates D M. Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. J. Memory Language 2008, 59:390-412.
4. Bates D, Maechler M, Dai B. lme4: linear mixed-effects models using s4 classes. 2008, http://lme4.r-forge.r-project.org/, R package version 0.999375-28
5. Bleakley B H, Brodie E D. Indirect genetic effects influence antipredator behaviour in guppies: estimates of the coefficient of interaction psi and the inheritance of reciprocity. Evolution 2009, 63:1796-1806.
6. Blows M W. Interaction between natural and sexual selection during the evolution of mate recognition. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 2002, 269:1113-1118.
7. Blows M W, Allan R A. Levels of mate recognition within and between two Drosophila species and their hybrids. Am. Nat. 1998, 152:826-837.
8. Burnham K P, Anderson D R. Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach 2002, Springer-Verlag, NY
9. Chenoweth S F, Blows M W. Signal trait sexual dimorphism and mutual sexual selection in Drosophila serrata. Evolution 2003, 57:2326-2334.
10. Chenoweth S F, Blows M W. Contrasting mutual sexual selection on homologous signal traits in Drosophila serrata. Am. Nat. 2005, 165:281-289.
11. Chenoweth S F, Blows M W. Dissecting the complex genetic basis of mate choice. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2006, 7:681-692.
12. Chenoweth S F, Rundle H R, Blows M W. Genetic constraints and the evolution of display trait sexual dimorphism by natural and sexual selection. Am. Nat. 2008, 171:22-34.
13. Danielson-Francois A M, Zhou Y H, Greenfield M D. Indirect genetic effects and the lek paradox: inter-genotypic competition may strengthen genotype × environment interactions and conserve genetic variance. Genetica 2009, 136:27-36.
14. Etges W J, Tripodi A D. Premating isolation is determined by larval rearing substrates in cactophilic Drosophila mojavensis. VIII. Mating success mediated by epicuticular hydrocarbons within and between isolated populations. J. Evol. Biol. 2008, 21:1641-1652.
15. Falconer D S, Mackay T F C. Introduction to quantitative genetics 1996, Longman, Essex, UK
16. Higgie M, Chenoweth S, Blows M W. Natural selection and the reinforcement of mate recognition. Science 2000, 290:519-521.
17. Hine E, Lachish S, Higgie M, Blows M W. Positive genetic correlation between female preference and offspring fitness. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 2002, 269:2215-2219.
18. Hine E, Chenoweth S F, Blows M W. Multivariate quantitative genetics and the lek paradox: genetic variance in male sexually selected traits of Drosophila serrata under field conditions. Evolution 2004, 58:2754-2762.
19. Jallon J M. A few chemical words exchanged by drosophila during courtship and mating. Behav. Genet. 1984, 14:441-478.
20. Kent C, Azanchi R, Smith B, Formosa A, Levine J D. Social context influences chemical communication in D. melanogaster males. Curr. Biol. 2008, 18:1384-1389.
21. Kirkpatrick M, Lande R. The evolution of maternal characters. Evolution 1989, 43:485-503.
22. Krupp J J, Kent C, Billeter J, Azanchi R, So A K, Schonfeld J A, Smith B P, Lucas C, Levine J D. Social experience modifies pheromone expression and mating behaviour in male Drosophila melanogaster. Curr. Biol. 2008, 18:1373-1383.
23. Lande R. Quantitative genetic analysis of multivariate evolution, applied to brain-body size allometry. Evolution 1979, 33:402-416.
24. Littell R C, Milliken G A, Stroup W W, Wolfinger R D, Schabenberger O. SAS for mixed models, 2nd ed 2006, SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC
25. Lynch M, Walsh B. Genetics and analysis of quantitative traits 1998, Sinauer, Sunderland, MA
26. McGlothlin J W, Brodie E D. How to measure indirect genetic effects: the congruence of trait-based and variance-partitioning approaches. Evolution 2009, 63:1785-1795.
27. Moore A J, Brodie E D, Wolf J B. Interacting phenotypes and the evolutionary process. 1. Direct and indirect genetic effects of social interactions. Evolution 1997, 51:1352-1362.
28. Petfield D, Chenoweth S F, Rundle H D, Blows M W. Genetic variance in female condition predicts indirect genetic variance in male sexual display traits. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2005, 102:6045-6050.
29. Ritchie M G. Behavioural genetics: the social fly. Curr. Biol. 2008, 18.
30. Rundle H D, Chenoweth S F, Blows M W. The roles of natural and sexual selection during adaptation to a novel environment. Evolution 2006, 60:2218-2225.
31. Rundle H D, Chenoweth S F, Blows M W. Comparing complex fitness surfaces: among-population variation in mutual sexual selection in Drosophila serrata. Am. Nat. 2008, 171:443-454.
32. Rundle H D, Chenoweth S F, Blows M W. The diversification of mate preferences by natural and sexual selection. J. Evol. Biol. 2009, 22:1608-1615.
33. Rundle H D, Chenoweth S F, Doughty P, Blows M W. Divergent selection and the evolution of signal traits and mating preferences. PLoS Biology 2005, 3:1988-1995.
34. Sall J, Creighton L, Lehman A. JMP Start Statistics: a guide to Statistics and Data Analysis using JMP and JMP IN Software 2005, Thomson Learning, Belmont, CA
35. Scheiner S M. Genetics and evolution of phenotypic plasticity. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 1993, 24:35-68.
36. Scheiner S M. Selection experiments and the study of phenotypic plasticity. J. Evol. Biol. 2002, 15:889-898.
37. Team R D C. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing 2008
38. Wilson A J, Gelin U, Perron M C, Reale D. Indirect genetic effects and the evolution of aggresion in a vertebrate system. Proc. Royal Soc. Lond. Series B 2009, 276:533-541.
39. Wolf J B, Brodie E D, Cheverud J M, Moore A J, Wade M J. Evolutionary consequences of indirect genetic effects. Trends. Ecol. Evol. 1998, 13:64-69.