Evolution of male and female genitalia following release from sexual selection

Evolution

Volumn 65, Issue 8, 2011, Pages 2171-2183

  Cayetano, Luis ^a,b,c   Maklakov, Alexei A ^d   Brooks, Robert C ^a   Bonduriansky, Russell ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

^b ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^c SWISS FEDERAL INSTITUTE OF AQUATIC SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Switzerland)

^d UPPSALA UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Adaptation; Allometry; Experimental evolution; Genitalia; Sexual selection

Indexed keywords

ADAPTATION; ALLOMETRY; ANTAGONISM; BEETLE; COEVOLUTION; EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY; LIFE HISTORY TRAIT; REPRODUCTIVE STRATEGY; SEXUAL SELECTION;

ADAPTATION; ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BEETLE; BODY SIZE; EVOLUTION; FEMALE; GENETIC SELECTION; GENITAL SYSTEM; HISTOLOGY; MALE; MATE CHOICE; PHYSIOLOGY; REPRODUCTION;

ADAPTATION, PHYSIOLOGICAL; ANIMALS; BEETLES; BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION; BODY SIZE; FEMALE; GENITALIA; MALE; MATING PREFERENCE, ANIMAL; REPRODUCTION; SELECTION, GENETIC;

BRUCHINAE; CALLOSOBRUCHUS MACULATUS; COLEOPTERA; HEXAPODA;

EID: 79960847761     PISSN: 00143820     EISSN: 15585646     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2011.01309.x     Document Type: Article

References (92)

1. Agrawal, A. F. 2001. Sexual selection and the maintenance of sexual reproduction. Nature 411:692-695.
2. Agrawal, A. F. 2002. Genetic loads under fitness-dependent mutation rates. J. Evol. Biol. 15:1004-1010.
3. Andersson, M. 1994. Sexual selection. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, NJ.
4. Anton, K.-W. 2000. Five new species of the Callosobruchus chinensis group from the Oriental Region and Australia (Coleoptera: Bruchidae: Bruchinae). Genus 11:13-28.
5. Arnqvist, G. 1998. Comparative evidence for the evolution of genitalia by sexual selection. Nature 393:784-786.
6. Arnqvist, G., and L. Rowe. 2002. Antagonistic coevolution between the sexes in a group of insects. Nature 415:787-789.
7. Arnqvist, G., and L. Rowe. 2005. Sexual conflict. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, NJ.
8. Bedhomme, S., N. G. Prasad, P. P. Jiang, and A. K. Chippindale. 2008. Reproductive behaviour evolves rapidly when intralocus sexual conflict is removed. PLoS ONE 3:e2187.
9. Bertin, A., and D. J. Fairbairn. 2007. The form of sexual selection on male gentalia cannot be inferred from within-population variance and allometry-a case study in Aquarius remigis. Evolution 61:825-837.
10. Bonduriansky, R. 2007. Sexual selection and allometry: a critical reappraisal of the evidence and ideas. Evolution 61:838-849.
11. Bonduriansky, R., and T. Day. 2003. The evolution of static allometry in sexually selected traits. Evolution 57:2450-2458.
12. Bonduriansky, R., A. Maklakov, F. Zajitschek, and R. Brooks. 2008. Sexual selection, sexual conflict and the evolution of ageing and life span. Funct. Ecol. 22:443-453.
13. Borgia, G. 1979. Sexual selection and the evolution of mating systems. Pp. 19-80 in M. S. Blum, and N. A. Blum, eds. Sexual selection and reproductive competition in insects. Academic Press, New York.
14. Brennan, P. L. R., R. O. Prum, K. G. McCracken, M. D. Sorenson, R. E. Wilson, and T. R. Birkhead. 2007. Coevolution of male and female genital morphology in waterfowl. PLoS ONE 2:e418.
15. Cameron, E., T. Day, and L. Rowe. 2003. Sexual conflict and indirect benefits. J. Evol. Biol. 16:1055-1060.
16. Cayetano, L. 2010. Evolutionary responses and condition dependence of male and female genital traits in the seed beetle Callosobruchus maculatus (Coleoptera: Bruchidae). Thesis. University of New South Wales, Sydney.
17. Chapman, T., L. F. Liddle, J. M. Kalb, M. F. Wolfner, and L. Partridge. 1995. Cost of mating in Drosophila melanogaster females is mediated by male accessory gland products. Nature 373:241-244.
18. Chenoweth, S., H. D. Rundle, and M. W. Blows. 2008. Genetic constraints and the evolution of display trait sexual dimorphism by natural and sexual selection. Am. Nat. 171:22-34.
19. Colgoni, A., and S. M. Vamosi. 2006. Sexual dimorphism and allometry in two seed beetles (Coleoptera: Bruchidae). Entomol. Sci. 9:171-179.
20. Crudgington, H. S., and M. T. Siva-Jothy. 2000. Genital damage, kicking and early death. Nature 407:855-856.
21. den Hollander, M., and D. T. Gwynne. 2009. Female fitness consequences of male harassment and copulation in seed beetles, Callosobruchus maculatus. Anim. Behav. 78:1061-1070.
22. Eady, P. E., L. Hamilton, and R. E. Lyons. 2007. Copulation, genital damage and early death in Callosobruchus maculatus. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 274:247-252.
23. Eberhard, W. G. 1985. Sexual selection and animal genitalia. Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, MA.
24. Eberhard, W. G. 1991. Copulatory courtship and cryptic female choice in insects. Biol. Rev. 66:1-31.
25. Eberhard, W. G. 1994. Evidence for widespread courtship during copulation in 131 species of insects and spiders, and implications for cryptic female choice. Evolution 48:711-733.
26. Eberhard, W. G. 1996. Female control: sexual selection by cryptic female choice. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, NJ.
27. Eberhard, W. G. 2010. Evolution of genitalia: theories, evidence, and new directions. Genetica 138:5-18.
28. Eberhard, W. G., and C. Cordero. 2003. Sexual conflict and female choice. Trends Ecol. Evol. 18:438-439.
29. Eberhard, W. G., B. A. Huber, R. L. Rodriguez, R. D. Briceño, I. Salas, and V. Rodriguez. 1998. One size fits all? Relationships between the size and degree of variation in genitalia and other body parts in twenty species of insects and spiders. Evolution 52:415-431.
30. Edvardsson, M., and T. Tregenza. 2005. Why do male Callosobruchus maculatus harm their mates? Behav. Ecol. 16:788-793.
31. Edward, D. A., C. Fricke, and T. Chapman. 2010. Adaptations to sexual selection and sexual conflict: insights from experimental evolution and artificial selection. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 365:2541-2548.
32. Emlen, D. J., and H. F. Nijhout. 2000. The development and evolution of exaggerated morphologies in insects. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 45:661-708.
33. Fox, C. W., M. L. Bush, and W. G. Wallin. 2003. Maternal age affects offspring lifespan of the seed beetle, Callosobruchus maculatus. Funct. Ecol. 17:811-820.
34. Fox, C. W., R. C. Stillwell, W. G. Wallin, and L. J. Hitchcock. 2006. Temperature and host species affect nuptial gift size in a seed-feeding beetle. Funct. Ecol. 20:1003-1011.
35. Friberg, U., and G. Arnqvist. 2003. Fitness effects of female mate choice: preferred males are detrimental for Drosophila melanogaster females. J. Evol. Biol. 16:797-811.
36. Gay, L., P. E. Eady, R. Vasudev, D. J. Hosken, and T. Tregenza. 2009. Costly sexual harassment in a beetle. Physiol. Entomol. 34:86-92.
37. Gay, L., D. J. Hosken, P. Eady, R. Vasudev, and T. Tregenza. 2011. The evolution of harm-effect of sexual conflicts and population size. Evolution 65:725-737.
38. Green, A. J. 1999. Allometry of genitalia in insects and spiders: one size does not fit all. Evolution 53:1621-1624.
39. Holland, B., and W. R. Rice. 1999. Experimental removal of sexual selection reverses intersexual antagonistic coevolution and removes a reproductive load. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 96:5083-5088.
40. Hosken, D. J., and P. Stockley. 2004. Sexual selection and genital evolution. Trends Ecol. Evol. 19:224-225.
41. Hosken, D. J., and T. Tregenza. 2005. Evolution: do bad husbands make good fathers? Curr. Biol. 15:R836-R838.
42. Hotzy, C., and G. Arnqvist. 2009. Sperm competition favors harmful males in seed beetles. Curr. Biol. 19:404-407.
43. Johnstone, R. A., and L. Keller. 2000. How males can gain by harming their mates: sexual conflict, seminal toxins, and the costs of mating. Am. Nat. 156:368-377.
44. Kamimura, Y. 2007. Twin intromittent organs of Drosophila for traumatic insemination. Biol. Lett. 3:401-404.
45. Kingsolver, J. M. 1979. Description of a new seed beetle from Australia (Coleoptera: Bruchidae). J. Aust. Ent. Soc. 10:179-182.
46. Kirkpatrick, M. 1996. Good genes and direct selection in the evolution of mating preferences. Evolution 50:2125-2140.
47. Kodric-Brown, A., R. M. Sibly, and J. H. Brown. 2006. The allometry of ornaments and weapons. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 103:8733-8738.
48. Kokko, H., and R. Brooks. 2003. Sexy to diet for? Sexual selection and the risk of extinction. Ann. Zool. Fennici 40:207-219.
49. Lessells, C. M., and P. T. Boag. 1987. Unrepeatable repeatabilities: a common mistake. Auk 104:116-121.
50. Lorch, P. D., S. R. Proulx, L. Rowe, and T. Day. 2003. Condition-dependent sexual selection can accelerate adaptation. Evol. Ecol. Res. 5:867-881.
51. Maklakov, A., R. Bonduriansky, and R. C. Brooks. 2009. Sex differences, sexual selection and ageing: an experimental evolution approach. Evolution 63:2491-2503.
52. Maklakov, A., L. Cayetano, R. C. Brooks, and R. Bonduriansky. 2010. The roles of life-history selection and sexual selection in the adaptive evolution of mating behaviour in a beetle. Evolution 64:1273-1282.
53. Maklakov, A. A., and G. Arnqvist. 2009. Testing for direct and indirect effects of mate choice by manipulating female choosiness. Curr. Biol. 19:1903-1906.
54. Martin, O. Y., and D. J. Hosken. 2003. Costs and benefits of evolving under experimentally enforced polyandry or monogamy. Evolution 57:2765-2772.
55. McArdle, B. H. 1988. The structural relationship-regression in biology. Can. J. Zool. 66:2329-2339.
56. Mergen, O. 2004. The female genital structure of some Bruchidius (Coleoptera, Bruchidae) species and their systematic importance. Ital. J. Zool. 71:101-106.
57. Messina, F. J., and M. E. Karren. 2003. Adaptation to a novel host modifies host discrimination by the seed beetle Callosobruchus maculatus. Anim. Behav. 65:501-507.
58. Moran, M. D. 2003. Arguments for rejecting the sequential Bonferroni in ecological studies. Oikos 100:403-405.
59. Mukerji, D., and M. A. H. Bhuya. 1937. Reproductive system of the bruchid beetles Bruchus quadrimaculatus Farb., Bruchus (Callosobruchus) chinensis L., (Bruchidae-Coleoptera). J. Morphol. 61:175-221.
60. Nessler, S. H., G. Uhl, and J. M. Schneider. 2007. A non-sperm transferring genital trait under sexual selection: an experimental approach. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 274:2337-2341.
61. Nur, N., and O. Hasson. 1984. Phenotypic plasticity and the handicap principles. J. Theor. Biol. 110:275-297.
62. Parker, G. A. 1979. Sexual selection and sexual conflict. Pp. 123-166 in M. S. Blum, and N. A. Blum, eds. Sexual selection and reproductive competition in insects. Academic Press, New York.
63. Partridge, L., and K. Fowler. 1990. Nonmating costs of exposure to males in female Drosophila melanogaster. J. Insect. Physiol. 36:419-425.
64. Perneger, T. V. 1998. What's wrong with Bonferroni adjustments. Br. Med. J. 316:1236-1238.
65. Pitnick, S., and F. Garcia-Gonzalez. 2002. Harm to females increases with male body size in Drosophila melanogaster. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 269:1821-1828.
66. Prasad, N. G., S. Bedhomme, T. Day, and A. K. Chippindale. 2007. An evolutionary cost of separate genders revealed by male-limited evolution. Am. Nat. 169:29-37.
67. Quinn, G. P., and M. J. Keough. 2002. Experimental design and data analysis for biologists. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK.
68. Rasband, W. S. 19972009. ImageJ. US National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD.
69. Reuter, M., J. R. Linklater, L. Lehmann, K. Fowler, T. Chapman, and G. D. D. Hurst. 2008. Adaptation to experimental alterations of the operational sex ratio in populations of Drosophila melanogaster. Evolution 62:401-412.
70. Rezac, M. 2009. The spider Harpactea sadistica: co-evolution of traumatic insemination and complex female genital morphology in spiders. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 276:2697-2701.
71. Rice, W. R. 1996. Sexually antagonistic male adaptation triggered by experimental arrest of female evolution. Nature 381:232-234.
72. Rice, W. R. 1998. Male fitness increases when females are eliminated from gene pool: implications for the Y chromosome. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 95:6217-6221.
73. Rönn, J., M. Katvala, and G. Arnqvist. 2007. Coevolution between harmful male genitalia and female resistance in seed beetles. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 104:10921-10925.
74. Rowe, L., and T. Day. 2006. Detecting sexual conflict and sexually antagonistic coevolution. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 361:277-285.
75. Rowe, L., and D. Houle. 1996. The lek paradox and the capture of genetic variance by condition dependent traits. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 263:1415-1421.
76. Savalli, U. M., and C. W. Fox. 1999. Effect of male mating history on paternal investment, fecundity, and female remating in the seed beetle Callosobruchus maculatus. Funct. Ecol. 13:169-177.
77. Schielzeth, H. 2010. Simple means to improve the interpretability of regression coefficients. Methods Ecol. Evol. 1:103-113.
78. Scudder, G. G. E. 1971. Comparative morphology of insect genitalia. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 16:379-406.
79. Simmons, L. W., and F. Garcia-Gonzalez. 2008. Evolutionary reduction in testis size and competitive fertilization success in response to the experimental removal of sexual selection in dung beetles. Evolution 62:2580-2591.
80. Simmons, L. W., C. M. House, J. Hunt, and F. García-González. 2009. Evolutionary response to sexual selection in male genital morphology. Curr. Biol. 19:1442-1446.
81. Smith, R. J. 2009. Use and misuse of the reduced major axis for life-fitting. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 140:476-486.
82. Southgate, B. J. 1971. On the identity of Caryedon pallidus (Olivier) (Col., Bruchidae), and the description of two new Caryedon spp. Bull. Ent. Res. 60:409-414.
83. Southgate, B. J., R. W. Howe, and G. A. Brett. 1957. The specific status of Callosobruchus maculatus (F.) and Callosobruchus analis (F.). Bull. Ent. Res. 48:79-89.
84. Stutt, A. D., and M. T. Siva-Jothy. 2001. Traumatic insemination and sexual conflict in the bed bug Cimex lectularius. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 98:5683-5687.
85. Tatarnic, N. J., G. Cassis, and D. F. Hochuli. 2006. Traumatic insemination in the plant bug genus Coridromius Signoret (Heteroptera: Miridae). Biol. Lett. 2:58-61.
86. Tilszer, M., K. Antoszczyk, N. Salek, E. Zajac, and J. Radwan. 2006. Evolution under relaxed sexual conflict in the bulb mite Rhizoglyphus robini. Evolution 60:1868-1873.
87. Ursprung, C., M. Den Hollander, and D. T. Gwynne. 2009. Female seed beetles, Callosobruchus maculatus, remate for male-supplied water rather than ejaculate nutrition. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 63:781-788.
88. Warton, D. I., I. J. Wright, D. S. Falster, and M. Westoby. 2006. Bivariate line-fitting methods for allometry. Biol. Rev. 81:259-291.
89. Wigby, S., and T. Chapman. 2004. Female resistance to male harm evolves in response to manipulation of sexual conflict. Evolution 58:1028-1037.
90. Wigby, S., and T. Chapman. 2005. Sex peptide causes mating costs in female Drosophila melanogaster. Curr. Biol. 15:316-321.
91. Wolfner, M. F. 1997. Tokens of love: functions and regulation of Drosophila male accessory gland products. Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol. 27:179-192.
92. Zahavi, A. 1975. Mate selection-selection for a handicap. J. Theor. Biol. 53:205-214.