Inbreeding affects sexual signalling in males but not females of Tenebrio molitor

Biology Letters

Volumn 8, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 423-425

  Pölkki, Mari ^a   Krams, Indrikis ^b,c   Kangassalo, Katariina ^a   Rantala, Markus J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TURKU   (Finland)

^b DAUGAVPILS UNIVERSITY   (Latvia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TARTU   (Estonia)

Author keywords

Good genes; Heterozygosity; Mate choice; Pheromones; Preference; Sexual selection

Indexed keywords

ADAPTATION; BEETLE; FEMALE; INBREEDING; MATE CHOICE; ODOR; PHEROMONE; SEXUAL SELECTION; SIGNALING; VOLATILE SUBSTANCE;

ANIMALIA; COLEOPTERA; TENEBRIO MOLITOR;

EID: 84861519368     PISSN: 17449561     EISSN: 1744957X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1098/rsbl.2011.1135     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Andersson, M. 1994 Sexual selection. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
2. Hamilton, W. D. & Zuk, M. 1982 Heritable true fitness and bright birds: a role for parasites. Science 218, 384-387. (doi:10.1126/science.7123238) (Pubitemid 13283877)
3. Brown, J. L. 1997 A theory of mate choice based on heterozygosity. Behav. Ecol. 8, 60-65.
4. Charlesworth, D. & Charlesworth, B. 1987 Inbreeding depression and its evolutionary consequences. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 18, 237-268.
5. Kempenaers, B. 2007 Mate choice and genetic quality: a review of the heterozygosity theory. Adv. Stud. Behav. 37, 189-278. (doi:10.1016/S0065- 3454(07)37005-8)
6. Rantala, M. J., Jokinen, I., Kortet, R., Vainikka, A. & Suhonen, J. 2002 Do pheromones reveal male immuno-competence? Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 269, 1681-1685. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2002.2056) (Pubitemid 34925523)
7. Bonduriansky, R. 2001 The evolution of male mate choice in insects: a synthesis of ideas and evidence. Biol. Rev. 76, 305-339. (doi:10.1017/ S1464793101005693) (Pubitemid 32824013)
8. Tanaka, Y., Honda, H., Ohsawa, K. & Yamamoto, I. 1986 A sex attractant of the yellow mealworm, Tenebrio molitor L, and its role in the mating behavior. J. Pestic. Sci. 11, 49-55.
9. Bryning, G. P., Chambers, J. & Wakefield, M. E. 2005 Identification of a sex pheromone from male yellow mealworm beetles, Tenebrio molitor. J. Chem. Ecol. 31, 2721-2730. (Pubitemid 41597344)
10. Rantala, M. J., Vainikka, A. & Kortet, R. 2003 The role of juvenile hormone in immune function and pheromone production trade-offs: a test of the immunocompetence handicap principle. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 270, 2257-2261. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2003.2472) (Pubitemid 37421764)
11. Rantala, M., Kortet, R., Kotiaho, J., Vainikka, A. & Suhonen, J. 2003 Condition dependence of pheromones and immune function in the grain beetle Tenebrio molitor. Funct. Ecol. 17, 534-540. (Pubitemid 37056820)
12. Worden, B. D., Parker, P. C. & Pappas, P. W. 2000 Parasites reduce attractiveness and reproductive success in male grain beetles. Anim. Behav. 59, 543-550. (doi:10. 1006/anbe.1999.1368) (Pubitemid 30656592)
13. Rantala, M. J., Viitaniemi, H. & Roff, D. A. 2011 Effects of inbreeding on potential and realized immune responses in Tenebrio molitor. Parasitology 138, 906-912. (doi:10.1017/s0031182011000473)
14. Roff, D. A. 1998 Effects of inbreeding on morphological and life history traits of the sand cricket, Gryllus firmus. Heredity 81, 28-37. (doi:10.1046/j.1365-2540.1998.00363.x) (Pubitemid 28351533)
15. Vainikka, A., Rantala, M. J., Seppälä, O. & Suhonen, J. 2007 Do male mealworm beetles, Tenebrio molitor, sustain the honesty of pheromone signals under immune challenge? Acta Ethol. 10, 63-72. (doi:10.1007/s10211-007-0031-0) (Pubitemid 47414756)
16. Ilmonen, P., Stundner, G., Thoss, M. & Penn, D. J. 2009 Females prefer the scent of outbred males: good-genes-as-heterozygosity? BMC Evol. Biol. 9, 104. (doi:10. 1186/1471-2148-9-104)
17. Drayton, J. M., Milner, R. N. C., Hunt, J. & Jennions, M. D. 2010 Inbreeding and advertisement calling in the cricket Teleogryllus commodus: laboratory and field experiments. Evolution 64, 3069-3083. (doi:10.1111/j.1558- 5646.2010.01053.x)
18. Aspi, J. 2000 Inbreeding and outbreeding depression in male courtship song characters in Drosophila montana. Heredity 84, 273-282. (doi:10.1046/j.1365-2540.2000.00655.x) (Pubitemid 30236591)
19. Qvarnström, A. & Forsgren, E. 1998 Should females prefer dominant males? Trends Ecol. Evol. 13,498-501. (doi:10.1016/S0169-5347(98)01513- 4) (Pubitemid 28547329)
20. Lehmann, L., Keller, L. F. & Kokko, H. 2007 Mate choice evolution, dominance effects, and the maintenance of genetic variation. J. Theor. Biol. 244, 282-295. (doi:10.1016/j.jtbi.2006.07.033) (Pubitemid 44779636)
21. Rantala, M. & Roff, D. 2007 Inbreeding and extreme outbreeding cause sex differences in immune defence and life history traits in Epirrita autumnata. Heredity 98, 329-336. (doi:10.1038/sj.hdy.6800945) (Pubitemid 46674476)
22. Carazo, P., Sanchez, E., Font, E. & Desfilis, E. 2004 Chemosensory cues allow male Tenebrio molitor beetles to assess the reproductive status of potential mates. Anim. Behav. 68, 123-129. (doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2003.10.014) (Pubitemid 38865832)
23. Kivleniece, I., Krams, I., Daukste, J., Krama, T. & Rantala, M. J. 2010 Sexual attractiveness of immune-challenged male mealworm beetles suggests terminal investment in reproduction. Anim. Behav. 80, 1015-1021. (doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2010.09.004)