The evolution of multiple mating: Costs and benefits of polyandry to females and of polygyny to males

Fly

Volumn 6, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 3-11

  Gowaty, Patricia Adair ^a,b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b SMITHSONIAN TROPICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Panama)

^c Polistes Foundation   (United States)

Author keywords

Compensation hypothesis; Cost of reproduction; Mating theory; Multiple insemination; Sexual conflict; Switch point theorem

Indexed keywords

DROSOPHILA PSEUDOOBSCURA;

EID: 84861420150     PISSN: 19336934     EISSN: 19336942     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4161/fly.18330     Document Type: Article

References (74)

1. Anderson WW. Frequent multiple insemination in a nutural population of Drosophila pseudoobura. Am Nat 1974. 108:709-11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/282949
2. Cobbs G. Multiple insemination and male sexual selection in natural populations of Drosophila pseuodoobscura. Am Nat 1977. 111:641-56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/283197
3. Levine L, Asmussen M, Olvera O, Powell JR, Delarosa ME, Salceda VM, et al. Population genetics of Mexican Drosophila 5. A high rate of multiple insemination in a natural population of Drosophila pseudoobscura. Am Nat 1980. 116:493-503. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/283644
4. Loukas M, Vergini Y, Krimbas CB. The genetics of drosophila subobscura populations. 18. Multiple insemination and sperm displacements in Drosophila subobscura. Genetica 1981. 57:29-37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00057540
5. Akin E, Levene H, Levine L, Rockwell R. A conservative procedure for the estimation of multiple insemination in Drosophila. American Naturalist 1984. 124:723-37.
6. Williams SM, Strobeck C. Measuring the multiple insemination frequency of Drosophila in nature: use of a Y-linked molecular marker. Evolution 1986. 40: 440-2. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2408827
7. Levine L, Akin E, Olvera O, Gaso MI, Rockwell RF, Gonzalez F, et al. Chromosomal and behavioral studies of Mexican Drosophila. 5. Frequencies of multiple insemination in 3 natural populations. Am Nat 1987. 129:458-62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/284650
8. Kambysellis MP, Craddock EM. Studies of oogenesis in natural populations of Drosophilidae. 4. Insemination patterns in hawaiian Drosophila species (Diptera, Drosophiliadae) correlated with ovarian development. J Insect Behav 1991. 4:83-100. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01092553
9. Aspi J, Lankinen P. Frequency of multiple insemination in a natural population of Drosophila montana. Hereditas 1992. 117:169-77. PMID:1459857. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1601-5223.1992.tb00171.x
10. Quezada-Díaz JE, Santos M, Ruiz A, Fontdevila A. The evolutionary history of Drosophia buzzatti. 25. Random mating in nature. Heredity 1992. 68:373-9. PMID:1563969. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/hdy.1992.53
11. Snook RR, Markow TA. Efficiency of gamete usage in nature: sperm storage, fertilization and polyspermy. Proc Biol Sci 2002. 269:467-73. PMID:11886638. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2001.1854
12. Yenisetti SC, Hegde SN. Remating in a Drosophilid: Phorticella striata. Kor J Genet 2002. 24:113-8.
13. Markow TA, Sawka S. Dynamics of mating success in experimental groups of Drosophila melanogaster (Diptera, Drosophilidae). J Insect Behav 1992. 5:375-83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01049845
14. Gromko MH, Markow TA. Courship and remating in field populations of Drosophila. Anim Behav 1993. 45:253-62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/anbe.1993.1031
15. Markow TA. Evolution of Drosophila mating systems. Evolutionary Biology, Vol 29 1996. 29:73-106.
16. Snook RR, Markow TA. Mating system evolution in sperm-heteromorphic Drosophila. J Insect Physiol 2001. 47:957-64. PMID:11472758. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1910(01)00070-1
17. Markow TA. Perspective: Female remating, operational sex ratio, and the arena of sexual selection in Drosophila species. Evolution 2002. 56:1725-34. PMID: 12389717
18. Rodríguez-Muñoz R. A. Bretman IA, Slate J, Walling CA, Tregenza T. Natural and sexual selection in a wild insect population. Science 2010. 328:1269-72. PMID:20522773. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1188102
19. House CM, Walling CA, Stamper CE, Moore AJ. Females benefit from multiple mating but not multiple mates in the burying beetle Nicrophorus vespilloides. J Evol Biol 2009. 22:1961-6. PMID:19682308. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1420-9101.2009.01800.x
20. Arnqvist G, Nilsson T. The evolution of polyandry: multiple mating and female fitness in insects. Anim Behav 2000. 60:145-64. PMID:10973716. http://dx. doi.org/10.1006/anbe.2000.1446
21. Gowaty PA. Beyond extra-pair paternity: individual constraints, fitness components, and social mating systems. In: Lucas J, Simmons L, eds. Essays on animal behavior: Celebrating 50 years of animal behaviour. Cambridge University: Cambridge, 2006: 221-56.
22. Firman RC, Cheam LY, Simmons LW. Sperm competition does not influence sperm hook morphology in selection lines of house mice. J Evol Biol 2011. 24:856-62. PMID:21306461. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1420-9101.2010.02219.x
23. Firman RC, Simmons LW. Sperm competition and the evolution of the sperm hook in house mice. J Evol Biol 2009. 22:2505-11. PMID:19878408. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1420-9101.2009.01867.x
24. Markow TA, O'grady P. Drosophila: A guide to species identification and use. Academic Press, 2005.
25. Bundgaard J, Barker JSF. Remating, sperm transfer, and sperm displacement in the cactophilic species Drosophila buzzatii Patterson & Wheeler (Diptera: Drosophilidae). Biol J Linn Soc Lond 2000. 71:145-64.
26. Markow TA, O'Grady P. Reproductive ecology of Drosophila. Funct Ecol 2008. 22:747-59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2435.2008.01457.x
27. Lacey Knowles L, Hernandez BB, Markow TA. Nonantagonistic interactions between the sexes revealed by the ecological consequences of reproductive traits. J Evol Biol 2005. 18:156-61. PMID:15669972. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1420-9101.2004.00779.x
28. Markow TA. A comparative investigation of the mating system of Drosophila hydei. Anim Behav 1985. 33:775-81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0003-3472 (85)80010-5
29. Bateman AJ. Intra-sexual selection in Drosophila. Heredity 1948. 2:349-68. PMID:18103134. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/hdy.1948.21
30. Tang-Martinez Z, Ryder TB. The problem with paradigms: Bateman's worldview as a case study. Integr Comp Biol 2005. 45:821-30. PMID:21676833. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/icb/45.5.821
31. Dewsbury DA. The Darwin-Bateman paradigm in historical context. Integr Comp Biol 2005. 45:831-7. PMID:21676834. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/icb/45.5.831
32. Snyder BF, Gowaty PA. A reappraisal of Bateman's classic study of intrasexual selection. Evolution 2007. 61:2457-68. PMID:17725639. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.2007.00212.x
33. Platt JR. Strong inference. Science 1964. 146:347-53. PMID:17739513. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.146.3642.347
34. Gowaty PA, Hubbell SP. Reproductive decisions under ecological constraints: It's about time. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2009. 106:10017-24. PMID:19528648.http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0901130106
35. Dewsbury DA. Ejaculate cost and male choice. Am Nat 1982. 119:601-10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/283938
36. Parker GA, Baker RR, Smith VGF. The origin and evolution of gamete dimorphism and the male-female phenomenon. J Theor Biol 1972. 36:529-53. PMID:5080448. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0022-5193(72)90007-0
37. Trivers RL. Parental investment and sexual selection. In: Campbell B, ed. Sexual selection and the descent of man. Chicago: Aldine, 1972:136-79.
38. Darwin C. The descent of man and selection in relation to sex. London: John Murray, 1871.
39. Gowaty PA, Steinichen R, Anderson WW. Mutual interest between the sexes and reproductive success in Drosophila pseudoobscura. Evolution 2002. 56:2537-40. PMID:12583593. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0014-3820.2002.tb00178.x
40. Gowaty PA, Steinichen R, Anderson WW. Indiscriminate females and choosy males: Within- and between-species variation in Drosophila. Evolution 2003. 57:2037-45. PMID:14575325
41. Arnold SJ. Bateman principles and the measurement of sexual selection in plants and animals. Am Nat 1994. 144:S126-49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/285656
42. Rice WR. Sexually antagonistic male adaptation triggered by experimental arrest of female evolution. Nature 1996. 381:232-4. PMID:8622764. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/381232a0
43. Chapman T. Seminal fluid-mediated fitness traits in Drosophila. Heredity 2001. 87:511-21. PMID: 11869341. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2540.2001.00961.x
44. Chapman T. The soup in my fly: Evolution, form and function of seminal fluid proteins. PLoS Biol 2008. 6:e179-82. PMID:18666830. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0060179
45. Chapman T, Bangham J, Vinti G, Seifried B, Lung O, Wolfner MF, et al. The sex peptide of Drosophila melanogaster: Female post-mating responses analyzed by using RNA interference. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2003. 100:9923-8. PMID:12893873. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1631635100
46. Chapman T, Davies SJ. Functions and analysis of the seminal fluid proteins of male Drosophila melanogaster fruit flies. Peptides 2004. 25:1477-90. PMID:15374649. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.peptides.2003.10.023
47. Chapman T, Herndon LA, Heifetz Y, Partridge L, Wolfner MF. The Acp26Aa seminal fluid protein is a modulator of early egg hatchability in Drosophila melanogaster. Proc Biol Sci 2001. 268:1647-54. PMID:11506676. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rspb. 2001.1684
48. Chapman T, Neubaum DM, Wolfner MF, Partridge L. The role of male accessory gland protein Acp36DE in sperm competition in Drosophila melanogaster. Proc Biol Sci 2000. 267:1097-105. PMID:10885514. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2000.1114
49. Gowaty PA. Sexual dialectics, sexual selection, and variation in mating behavior. In: Gowaty PA, ed. Feminism and Evolutionary Biology. New York: Chapman Hall, 1997:351-84.
50. Holland B, Rice WR. Perspective: Chase-away sexual selection: antagonistic seduction versus resitance. Evolution 1998. 52:1-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2410914
51. Markow TA, Coppola A, Watts TD. How Drosophila males make eggs: it is elemental. Proc Biol Sci 2001. 268:1527-32. PMID:11454298. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2001.1673
52. Markow TA, Ankney PF. Drosophila males contribute to oogenesis in a multiple mating species. Science 1984. 224:302-3. PMID:17734916. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.224.4646.302
53. Roughgarden J, Oishi M, Akcay E. Reproductive social behavior: cooperative games to replace sexual selection. Science 2006. 311:965-9. PMID:16484485. http://dx. doi.org/10.1126/science.1110105
54. Bono JM, Matzkin LM, Kelleher ES, Markow TA. Postmating transcriptional changes in reproductive tracts of con- and heterospecifically mated Drosophila mojavensis females. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2011. 108:7878-83. PMID:21518862. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1100388108
55. Moore AJ, Pizzari T. Quantitative genetic models of sexual conflict based on interacting phenotypes. Am Nat 2005. 165:S88-97. PMID:15795865. http://dx. doi.org/10.1086/429354
56. Hrdy SB. Infanticide among animals: A review, classification, and examination of the implications for the reproductive strategies of females. Ethol Sociobiol 1979. 1:13-40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0162-3095 (79)90004-9
57. Hrdy SB. The woman that never evolved. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1981.
58. Eberhard EB. Female control: Sexual selection by cryptic female choice. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996.
59. Gowaty PA. Architects of sperm competition. Trends Ecol Evol 1994. 9:160-2. PMID:21236807. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0169-5347(94)90076-0
60. Clark AG, Begun DJ. Female genotypes affect sperm displacement in Drosophila. Genetics 1998. 149:1487-93. PMID:9649536
61. Clark AG, Begun DJ, Prout T. Female x male interactions in Drosophila sperm competition. Science 1999. 283:217-20. PMID:9880253. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.283.5399.217
62. Gowaty PA. Reproductive compensation. J Evol Biol 2008. 21:1189-200. PMID:18564347. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1420-9101.2008.01559.x
63. Gowaty PA, Anderson WW, Bluhm CK, Drickamer LC, Kim YK, Moore AJ. The hypothesis of reproductive compensation and its assumptions about mate preferences and offspring viability. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2007. 104:15023-7. PMID:17848509. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0706622104
64. Gowaty PA, Hubbell SP. Chance, time allocation, and the evolution of adaptively flexible sex role behavior. Integr Comp Biol 2005. 45:931-44. PMID:21676844.http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/icb/45.5.931
65. Brown WD, Bjork A, Schneider K, Pitnick S. No evidence that polyandry benefits females in Drosophila melanogaster. Evolution 2004. 58:1242-50. PMID:15266973
66. Hosken DJ, Stockley P. Benefits of polyandry: A life history perspective. Evol Biol 2003. 33:173-94.
67. Gowaty PA, Kim YK, Rawlings J, Anderson WW. Polyandry increases offspring viability and mother productivity but does not decrease mother survival in Drosophila pseudoobscura. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2010. 107:13771-6. PMID:20643932. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1006174107
68. Priest NK, Galloway LF, Roach DA. Mating frequency and inclusive fitness in Drosophila melanogaster. Am Nat 2008. 171:10-21. PMID:18171147. http://dx.doi. org/10.1086/523944
69. Gowaty PA, Hubbell SP. Killing time: A mechanism of sexual selection and sexual conflict. In: Leonard J, Cordoba-Aguilar A, eds. Primary Sexual Characters in Animals Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010:79-96.
70. Anderson WW, Kim YK, Gowaty PA. Experimental constraints on mate preferences in Drosophila pseudoobscura decrease offspring viability and fitness of mated pairs. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2007. 104:4484-8. PMID:17360550. http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0611152104
71. Hubbell SP, Johnson LK. Environmental variance in lifetime mating success, mate choice, and sexual selection. Am Nat 1987. 130:91-112. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/284700
72. Kim y-K, Weber MB, Anderson WW, Gowaty PA. No evidence of intrinsic quality differences between preferred and non-preferred Drosophila pseudoobscura in tests of mate preferences. Journal of Integrative Zoology 2010. In press.
73. West-Eberhard MJ. Developmental plasticity and evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.
74. Markow TA. "Cost" of virginity in wild Drosophila melanogaster females. Ecology and Evolution 2011. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.54