Coevolution of male mating signal and female preference during early lineage divergence of the Hawaiian cricket, Laupala Cerasina

Evolution

Volumn 65, Issue 8, 2011, Pages 2184-2196

  Grace, Jaime L ^a   Shaw, Kerry L ^b  

^a University of Maryland   (United States)

^b Cornell University ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

Phenotypic divergence; Preference functions; Sexual selection; Speciation

Indexed keywords

COEVOLUTION; CRICKET; GENE FLOW; GEOGRAPHICAL VARIATION; PHENOTYPIC PLASTICITY; PROBABILITY; REPRODUCTIVE ISOLATION; SEXUAL SELECTION; SIGNAL;

ANIMAL; ANIMAL COMMUNICATION; ARTICLE; EVOLUTION; FEMALE; GENE FLOW; GENETIC SELECTION; GENETICS; GRYLLIDAE; MALE; MATE CHOICE; PHENOTYPE; PHYSIOLOGY;

ANIMAL COMMUNICATION; ANIMALS; BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION; FEMALE; GENE FLOW; GRYLLIDAE; MALE; MATING PREFERENCE, ANIMAL; PHENOTYPE; SELECTION, GENETIC;

LAUPALA; LAUPALA CERASINA;

EID: 79960836441     PISSN: 00143820     EISSN: 15585646     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2011.01278.x     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Boake, C. R. B. 2002. Sexual signaling and speciation, a microevolutionary perspective. Genetica 116:205-214.
2. Boughman, J. W. 2002. How sensory drive can promote speciation. Trends Ecol. Evol. 17:571-577.
3. Brooks, R., J. Hunt, M. W. Blows, M. J. Smith, L. F. Bussiere, and M. D. Jennions. 2005. Experimental evidence for multivariate stabilizing sexual selection. Evolution 59:871-880.
4. Brown, W. D., J. Wideman, M. C. B. Andrade, A. C. Mason, and D. T. Gwynne. 1996. Female choice for an indicator of male size in the song of the black-horned tree cricket Oecanthus nigricornis (Orthoptera: Gryllidae: Oecanthinae). Evolution 50:2400-2411.
5. Butlin, R. K., and M. G. Ritchie. 1989. Genetic coupling in mate recognition systems-what is the evidence? Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 37:237-246.
6. Darwin, C. 1871. The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex. J. Murray, London.
7. Dieckmann, U., and M. Doebeli. 1999. On the origin of species by sympatric speciation. Nature 400:354-357.
8. Endler, J. A. 1992. Signals, signal conditions, and the direction of evolution. Am. Nat. 139:S125-S153.
9. Gerhardt, H. C. 1991. Female mate choice in treefrogs: static and dynamic acoustic criteria. Anim. Behav. 42:615-635.
10. Gerhardt, H. C., and F. Huber. 2002. Acoustic communication in insects and anurans. Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago.
11. Gerhardt, H. C., and R. Brooks. 2009. Experimental analysis of multivariate female choice in gray treefrogs (Hyla versicolor): evidence for directional and stabilizing selection. Evolution 63:2504-2512.
12. Grace, J. L., and K. L. Shaw. 2004. Effects of developmental environment on signal-preference coupling in a Hawaiian cricket. Evolution 58:1627-1633.
13. Hall, D. W., and M. Kirkpatrick. 2006. Reinforcement and sex linkage. Evolution 60:908-921.
14. Härdling, R., and K. Karlsson. 2009. The dynamics of sexually antagonistic coevolution and the complex influences of mating system and genetic correlation. J. Theor. Biol. 260:276-282.
15. Hayashi, T. I., M. Vose, and S. Gavrilets. 2007. Genetic differentiation by sexual conflict. Evolution 61:516-529.
16. Hoskin, C. J., and M. Higgie. 2010. Speciation via species interactions: the divergence of mating traits within species. Ecol. Lett. 13:409-420.
17. Kirkpatrick, M. 1982. Sexual selection and the evolution of female choice. Evolution 36:1-12.
18. Kondrashov, A. S., and F. A. Kondrashov. 1999. Interactions among quantitative traits in the course of sympatric speciation. Nature 400:351-354.
19. Lande, R. 1981. Models of speciation by sexual selection on polygenic traits. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 78:3721-3725.
20. Lande, R. 1982. Rapid origin of sexual isolation and character divergence in a cline. Evolution 36:213-223.
21. Mayr, E. 1963. Animal species and evolution. Belknap Press, Cambridge, MA.
22. Mendelson, T. C., and K. L. Shaw. 2002. Genetic and behavioral components of the cryptic species boundary between Laupala cerasina and L-kohalensis (Orthoptera: Gryllidae). Genetica 116:301-310.
23. Mendelson, T. C., and K. L. Shaw. 2005. Sexual behaviour: rapid speciation in an arthropod. Nature 433:375-376.
24. Otte, D. 1989. Speciation in Hawaiian crickets. Pp. 482-526 in D. Otte and J. A. Endler, eds. Speciation and its consequences. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA.
25. Otte, D. 1994.The crickets of Hawaii: origin, systematics, and evolution. The Orthopterists' Society at the Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia.
26. Panhuis, T. M., R. Butlin, M. Zuk, and T. Tregenza. 2001. Sexual selection and speciation. Trends Ecol. Evol. 16:364-371.
27. Parsons, Y. M., and K. L. Shaw. 2001. Species boundaries and genetic diversity among Hawaiian crickets of the genus Laupala identified using amplified fragment length polymorphism. Mol. Ecol. 10:1765-1772.
28. Prohl, H., R. A. Koshy, U. Mueller, A. S. Rand, and M. J. Ryan. 2006. Geographic variation of genetic and behavioral traits in northern and southern Tungara frogs. Evolution 60:1669-1679.
29. Prohl, H., S. Hagemann, J. Karsch, and G. Hobel. 2007. Geographic variation in male sexual signals in strawberry poison frogs (Dendrobates pumilio). Ethology 113:825-837.
30. Reynolds, R. G., and B. M. Fitzpatrick. 2007. Assortative mating in poison-dart frogs based on an ecologically important trait. Evolution 61:2253-2259.
31. Ritchie, M. G. 1996. The shape of female mating preferences. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 93:14628-14631.
32. Ritchie, M. G. 2007. Sexual selection and speciation. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 38:79-102.
33. Rodriguez, R. L., K. Ramaswamy, and R. B. Cocroft. 2006. Evidence that female preferences have shaped male signal evolution in a clade of specialized plant-feeding insects. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 273:2585-2593.
34. Ryan, M. J., X. E. Bernal, and A. S. Rand. 2007. Patterns of mating call preferences in tungara frogs, Physalaemus pustulosus. J. Evol. Biol. 20:2235-2247.
35. Shaw, K. L. 1996. Polygenic inheritance of a behavioral phenotype: interspecific genetics of song in the Hawaiian cricket genus Laupala. Evolution 50:256-266.
36. Shaw, K. L. 1999. A nested analysis of song groups and species boundaries in the Hawaiian cricket genus Laupala. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 11:332-341.
37. Shaw, K. L. 2000. Interspecific genetics of mate recognition: inheritance of female acoustic preference in Hawaiian crickets. Evolution 54:1303-1312.
38. Shaw, K. L. 2001. The genealogical view of speciation-commentary. J. Evol. Biol. 14:880-882.
39. Shaw, K. L. 2002. Conflict between nuclear and mitochondrial DNA phylogenies of a recent species radiation: what mtDNA reveals and conceals about modes of speciation in Hawaiian crickets. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99:16122-16127.
40. Shaw, K. L., and D. P. Herlihy. 2000. Acoustic preference functions and song variability in the Hawaiian cricket Laupala cerasina. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 267:577-584.
41. Shaw, K. L., and A. Khine. 2004. Courtship behavior in the Hawaiian cricket Laupala cerasina: males provide spermless spermatophores as nuptial gifts. Ethology 110:81-96.
42. Shaw, K. L., and S. C. Lesnick. 2009. Genomic linkage of male song and female acoustic preference QTL underlying a rapid species radiation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 106:9737-9742.
43. Shaw, K. L., and S. P. Mullen. 2011. Genes versus phenotypes in the study of speciation. Genetica, doi:.
44. Shaw, K. L., Y. M. Parsons, and S. C. Lesnick. 2007. QTL analysis of a rapidly evolving speciation phenotype in the Hawaiian cricket Laupala. Mol. Ecol. 16:2879-2892.
45. Simmons, L. W. 2004. Genotypic variation in calling song and female preferences of the field cricket Teleogryllus oceanicus. Anim. Behav. 68:313-322.
46. Simmons, L. W., and M. G. Ritchie. 1996. Symmetry in the songs of crickets. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 263:1305-1311.
47. Simmons, L. W., M. Zuk, and J. T. Rotenberry. 2001. Geographic variation in female preference functions and male songs of the field cricket Teleogryllus oceanicus. Evolution 55:1386-1394.
48. Sullivan-Beckers, L., and R. B. Cocroft. 2010. The importance of female choice, male-male competition, and signal transmission as causes of selection on male mating signals. Evolution 64:3158-3171.
49. Uy, J. A. C., R. G. Moyle, and C. E. Filardi. 2009. Plumage and song differences mediate species recognition between incipient flycatcher species of the Solomon Islands. Evolution 63:153-164.
50. Uyeda, J. C., S. J. Arnold, P. A. Hohenlohe, and L. S. Mead. 2009. Drift promotes speciation by sexual selection. Evolution 63:583-594.
51. Verzijden, M. N., R. F. Lachlan, and M. R. Servedio. 2005. Female mate-choice behavior and sympatric speciation. Evolution 59:2097-2108.
52. Wagner, W. E. 1998. Measuring female mating preferences. Anim. Behav. 55:1029-1042.
53. West-Eberhard, M. J. 1983. Sexual Selection, Social Competition, and Speciation. Q. Rev. Biol. 58:155-183.
54. Wiley, C., and K. L. Shaw. 2010. Multiple genetic linkages between female preference and male signal in rapidly speciating Hawaiian crickets. Evolution 64:2238-2245.