MHC-dependent mate choice in humans: Why genomic patterns from the HapMap European American dataset support the hypothesis

BioEssays

Volumn 34, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 267-271

  Laurent, Romain ^a   Chaix, Raphaëlle ^a  

^a Université Diderot Paris 7   (France)

Author keywords

Disassortative mating; Genome; HapMap; Heterogamy; MHC

Indexed keywords

ASSORTATIVE MATING; GENETIC ASSOCIATION; GENETIC DATABASE; GENETIC RECOMBINATION; GENETIC SCREENING; GENOME; HAPLOTYPE MAP; HUMAN; MAJOR HISTOCOMPATIBILITY COMPLEX; MATE CHOICE; NOTE; NULL HYPOTHESIS;

CHOICE BEHAVIOR; EUROPEAN CONTINENTAL ANCESTRY GROUP; FEMALE; GENOME, HUMAN; HAPMAP PROJECT; HUMANS; MAJOR HISTOCOMPATIBILITY COMPLEX; MALE; SEXUAL PARTNERS;

EID: 84858294112     PISSN: 02659247     EISSN: 15211878     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/bies.201100150     Document Type: Note

References (38)

1. Horton R, Wilming L, Rand V, Lovering RC, et al. 2004. Gene map of the extended human MHC. Nat Rev Genet 5: 889-99.
2. Milinski M. 2006. The major histocompatibility complex, sexual selection, and mate choice. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 37: 159-86.
3. Parham P, Ohta T. 1996. Population biology of antigen presentation by MHC class I molecules. Science 272: 67-74.
4. Penn DJ, Potts WK. 1999. The evolution of mating preferences and major histocompatibility complex genes. Am Nat 153: 145-64.
5. Havlicek J, Roberts SC. 2009. MHC-correlated mate choice in humans: a review. Psychoneuroendocrinology 34: 497-512.
6. Thornhill R, Gangestad SW, Miller R, Scheyd G, et al. 2003. Major histocompatibility complex genes, symmetry, and body scent attractiveness in men and women. Behav Ecol 14: 668-78.
7. Wedekind C, Furi S. 1997. Body odour preferences in men and women: do they aim for specific MHC combinations or simply heterozygosity? Proc Biol Sci 264: 1471-9.
8. Wedekind C, Seebeck T, Bettens F, Paepke AJ. 1995. MHC-dependent mate preferences in humans. Proc Biol Sci 260: 245-9.
9. Jacob S, McClintock MK, Zelano B, Ober C. 2002. Paternally inherited HLA alleles are associated with women's choice of male odor. Nat Genet 30: 175-9.
10. Lie HC, Rhodes G, Simmons LW. 2008. Genetic diversity revealed in human faces. Evolution 62: 2473-86.
11. Lie HC, Simmons LW, Rhodes G. 2010. Genetic dissimilarity, genetic diversity, and mate preferences in humans. Evol Hum Behav 31: 48-58.
12. Roberts SC, Little AC, Gosling LM, Perrett DI, et al. 2005. MHC-heterozygosity and human facial attractiveness. Evol Hum Behav 26: 213-26.
13. Roberts SC, Little AC, Gosling LM, Jones BC, et al. 2005. MHC-assortative facial preferences in humans. Biol Lett 1: 400-3.
14. Ober C, Weitkamp LR, Cox N, Dytch H, et al. 1997. HLA and mate choice in humans. Am J Hum Genet 61: 497-504.
15. Hedrick PW, Black FL. 1997. HLA and mate selection: no evidence in South Amerindians. Am J Hum Genet 61: 505-11.
16. Jin K, Speed TP, Thomson G. 1995. Tests of random mating for a highly polymorphic locus: application to HLA data. Biometrics 51: 1064-76.
17. Nordlander C, Hammarstrom L, Lindblom B, Smith CI. 1983. No role of HLA in mate selection. Immunogenetics 18: 429-31.
18. Pollack MS, Wysocki CJ, Beauchamp GK, Braun D Jr, et al. 1982. Absence of HLA association or linkage for variations in sensitivity to the odor of androstenone. Immunogenetics 15: 579-89.
19. Rosenberg LT, Cooperman D, Payne R. 1983. HLA and mate selection. Immunogenetics 17: 89-93.
20. Frazer KA, Ballinger DG, Cox DR, Hinds DA, et al. 2007. A second generation human haplotype map of over 3.1 million SNPs. Nature 449: 851-61.
21. Chaix R, Cao C, Donnelly P. 2008. Is mate choice in humans MHC-dependent? PLoS Genet 4: e1000184.
22. Derti A, Cenik C, Kraft P, Roth FP. 2010. Absence of evidence for MHC-dependent mate selection within HapMap populations. PLoS Genet 6: e1000925.
23. McVean G, Spencer CC. 2006. Scanning the human genome for signals of selection. Curr Opin Genet Dev 16: 624-9.
24. Wall JD. 1999. Recombination and the power of statistical tests of neutrality. Genet Res 74: 65-79.
25. Noble WS. 2009. How does multiple testing correction work? Nat Biotechnol 27: 1135-7.
26. Stephens M, Balding DJ. 2009. Bayesian statistical methods for genetic association studies. Nat Rev Genet 10: 681-90.
27. WTCCC. 2007. Genome-wide association study of 14, 000 cases of seven common diseases and 3, 000 shared controls. Nature 447: 661-78.
28. Roberts SC. 2009. Complexity and context of MHC-correlated mating preferences in wild populations. Mol Ecol 18: 3121-3.
29. Khankhanian P, Gourraud PA, Caillier SJ, Santaniello A, et al. 2010. Genetic variation in the odorant receptors family 13 and the mhc loci influence mate selection in a multiple sclerosis dataset. BMC Genomics 11: 626.
30. Lincoln MR, Montpetit A, Cader MZ, Saarela J, et al. 2005. A predominant role for the HLA class II region in the association of the MHC region with multiple sclerosis. Nat Genet 37: 1108-12.
31. Ober C, Hyslop T, Hauck WW. 1999. Inbreeding effects on fertility in humans: evidence for reproductive compensation. Am J Hum Genet 64: 225-31.
32. Woelfing B, Traulsen A, Milinski M, Boehm T. 2009. Does intra-individual major histocompatibility complex diversity keep a golden mean? Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 364: 117-28.
33. Birkhead TR, Pizzari T. 2002. Postcopulatory sexual selection. Nat Rev Genet 3: 262-73.
34. Setchell JM, Huchard E. 2010. The hidden benefits of sex: evidence for MHC-associated mate choice in primate societies. BioEssays 32: 940-8.
35. Ziegler A, Dohr G, Uchanska-Ziegler B. 2002. Possible roles for products of polymorphic MHC and linked olfactory receptor genes during selection processes in reproduction. Am J Reprod Immunol 48: 34-42.
36. Ziegler A, Kentenich H, Uchanska-Ziegler B. 2005. Female choice and the MHC. Trends Immunol 26: 496-502.
37. Ziegler A, Santos PS, Kellermann T, Uchanska-Ziegler B. 2010. Self/nonself perception, reproduction and the extended MHC. Self Nonself 1: 176-91.
38. Laurent R, Toupance B, Chaix R. 2012. Non random mate choice in humans: insights from a genome scan. Mol Ecol 21: 587-96.