Sexual selection accounts for the geographic reversal of sexual size dimorphism in the dung fly, sepsis punctum (diptera: Sepsidae)

Evolution

Volumn 66, Issue 7, 2012, Pages 2117-2126

  Puniamoorthy, Nalini ^a,b   Schäfer, Martin A ^a   Blanckenhorn, Wolf U ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^b NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE   (Singapore)

Author keywords

Body size; Natural selection; Population differentiation; Sepsid flies; Sexual selection; Speciation

Indexed keywords

BODY SIZE; CLUTCH SIZE; EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; FLY; INTERPOPULATION VARIATION; PAIR BOND; REPRODUCTIVE SUCCESS; SEX RATIO; SEXUAL DIMORPHISM; SEXUAL SELECTION; SIZE STRUCTURE; SPECIATION (BIOLOGY);

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BODY SIZE; DIPTERA; EUROPE; FEMALE; FERTILITY; GENETIC SELECTION; MALE; MATE CHOICE; PHYSIOLOGY; SEX RATIO; SEXUAL DEVELOPMENT; UNITED STATES;

ANIMALS; BODY SIZE; DIPTERA; EUROPE; FEMALE; FERTILITY; MALE; MATING PREFERENCE, ANIMAL; SELECTION, GENETIC; SEX CHARACTERISTICS; SEX RATIO; UNITED STATES;

EUROPE; NORTH AMERICA;

DIPTERA; SCATHOPHAGIDAE; SEPSIDAE; SEPSIS (DIPTERAN FLY); SEPSIS PUNCTUM;

EID: 84863459480     PISSN: 00143820     EISSN: 15585646     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2012.01599.x     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. Abouheif, E., and D. J. Fairbairn. 1997. A comparative analysis of allometry for sexual size dimorphism: assessing Rensch's rule. Am. Nat. 149:540-562.
2. Andersen, N. M. 1994. The evolution of sexual size dimorphism and mating systems in water striders (Hemiptera: Gerridae). Ecoscience 1:208-214.
3. Andersson, M. 1994. Sexual selection. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, NJ.
4. Arak, A. 1988. Sexual size dimorphism in body size--a model and a test. Evolution 42:820-825.
5. Arnold, S. J., and M. J. Wade. 1984a. On the measurement of natural selection and sexual selection-applications. Evolution 38:720-734.
6. Arnold, S. J., and M. J. Wade. 1984b. On the measurement of natural selection and sexual selection-theory. Evolution 38:709-719.
7. Arnqvist, G., M. Edvardsson, U. Friberg, and T. Nilsson. 2000. Sexual conflict promotes speciation in insects. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 97:10460-10464.
8. Badyaev, A. 2002. Growing apart: an ontogenetic perspective on the evolution of sexual size dimorphism. Trends Ecol. Evol. 17:369-378.
9. Badyaev, A.V., and G. E. Hill. 2000. The evolution of sexual dimorphism in the house finch. I. Population divergence in morphological covariance structure. Evolution 54:1784-1794.
10. Blanckenhorn, W. U. 2000. The evolution of body size: what keeps organisms small? Q. Rev. Biol. 75:385-407.
11. Blanckenhorn, W. U. 2007. Case studies of the differential equilibrium hypothesis of sexual size dimorphism in dung flies. Pp. 106-114 in D. J. Fairbairn, W. U. Blanckenhorn, and T. Szekely, eds. Sex, size and gender roles. Evolutionary studies of sexual size dimorphism. Oxford Univ. Press., London, UK.
12. Blanckenhorn, W. U., C. Morf, C. Muhlhauser, and T. Reusch. 1999. Spatiotemporal variation in selection on body size in the dung fly Sepsis cynipsea. J. Evol. Biol.12:563-576.
13. Blanckenhorn, W. U., U. R. S. Kraushaar, Y. Teuschl, and C. Reim. 2004. Sexual selection on morphological and physiological traits and fluctuating asymmetry in the black scavenger fly Sepsis cynipsea. J. Evol. Biol. 17:629-641.
14. Blanckenhorn, W. U., A. F. G. Dixon, D. J. Fairbairn, M. W. Foellmer, P. Gibert, K. van der Linde, R. Meier, S. Nylin, S. Pitnick, C. Schoff, et al. 2007a. Proximate causes of Rensch's rule: does sexual size dimorphism in arthropods result from sex differences in development time? Am. Nat. 169:245-257.
15. Blanckenhorn, W. U., R. Meier, and T. Teder. 2007b. Rensch's rule in insects: patterns among and within species. Pp. 60-70 in D. J. Fairbairn, W. U. Blanckenhorn, and T. Szekely, eds. Sex, size, and gender roles: evolutionary studies of sexual size dimorphism. Oxford Univ. Press, London, UK.
16. Boake, C. R. B. 2005. Sexual selection and speciation in Hawaiian Drosophila. Behav. Genet. 35:297-303.
17. Bonduriansky, R. 2001. The evolution of male mate choice in insects: a synthesis of ideas and evidence. Biol. Rev. 76:305-339.
18. Clutton-Brock, T. H., S. D. Albon, and F. E. Guiness. 1988. Reproductive success in male and female deer. Pp. 325-343 in T. H. Clutton-Brock, ed. Reproductive success. Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
19. Ding, A., and W. U. Blanckenhorn. 2002. The effect of sexual size dimorphism on mating behaviour in two dung flies with contrasting dimorphism. Evol. Ecol. Res. 4:259-273.
20. Drovetski, S. V., S. Rohwer, and N. A. Mode. 2006. Role of sexual and natural selection in evolution of body size and shape: a phylogenetic study of morphological radiation in grouse. J. Evol. Biol. 19:1083-1091.
21. Eberhard, W. G. 2001. Species-specific genitalic copulatory courtship in sepsid flies (Diptera, Sepsidae, Microsepsis) and theories of genitalic evolution. Evolution 55:93-102.
22. Fairbairn, D. J. 1997. Allometry for sexual size dimorphism: pattern and process in the coevolution of body size in males and females. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 28:659-687.
23. Fairbairn, D. J., and R. F. Preziosi. 1994. Sexual selection and the evolution of allometry for sexual size dimorphism in the water strider, Aquarius remigis. Am. Nat. 144:101-118.
24. Fairbairn, D. J., W. U. Blanckenhorn, and T. Szekely. 2007. Sex, size and gender roles: evolutionary studies of sexual size dimorphism. Oxford Univ. Press, London, UK.
25. Fox, C. W., and M. E. Czesak. 2006. Selection on body size and sexual size dimorphism differs between host species in a seed-feeding beetle. J. Evol. Biol. 19:1167-1174.
26. Gavrilets, S., and T. I. Hayashi. 2005. Speciation and sexual conflict. Evol. Ecol. 19:167-198.
27. Gray, D. A., and W. H. Cade. 2000. Sexual selection and speciation in field crickets. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 97:14449-14454.
28. Hafez, M. 1948. Ecological and biological observations on some coprophagous Sepsidae (Diptera). Proc. R. Entomol. Soc. Lond. 23:99-103.
29. Hammer, O. 1941. Biological and ecological investigations on flies associated with pasturing cattle and their excrement. Vidensk. Medd. Dansk Naturhist. Foren. 105:141-394.
30. Hu, Y. W., Y. J. Xie, F. Zhu, C. B. Wang, and C. L. Lei. 2010. Variation in sexual size dimorphism among populations: testing the differential-plasticity hypothesis. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 137:204-209.
31. Hu, Y. W., X. Yuan, and C. L. Lei. 2011. Sexual size dimorphism decreases with temperature in a blowfly, Chrysomya megacephala (Fabricius) (Diptera: Calliphoridae). Ecol. Entomol. 36:111-115.
32. Ingram, K. K., T. Laamanen, N. Puniamoorthy, and R. Meier. 2008. Lack of morphlogical coevolution between male forelegs and female wings in Themira (Sepsidae: Dipera: Insecta). Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 93:227-238.
33. Lande, R., and S. J. Arnold. 1983. The measurement of selection on correlated characters. Evolution 37:1210-1226.
34. Lindenfors, P., B. S. Tullberg, and M. Biuw. 2002. Phylogenetic analyses of sexual selection and sexual size dimorphism in pinnipeds. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 52:188-193.
35. Liu, X. A., Y. M. Li, and M. McGarrity. 2010. Geographical variation in body size and sexual size dimorphism of introduced American bullfrogs in southwestern China. Biol. Invasions 12:2037-2047.
36. Lyapkov, S. M., V. G. Cherdantsev, and E. M. Cherdantseva. 2010. Geographic variation of sexual dimorphism in the moor frog (Rana arvalis) as a result of differences in reproductive strategies. ZH. Obshch. Biol. 71:337-358.
37. Mangan, R. L. 1976. Themira athabasca n. sp. (Diptera: Sepsidae) with a revised key to North American Themira and notes on the sexual morphology of sympatric species. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 69:1024-1028.
38. McGarrity, M. E., and S. A. Johnson. 2009. Geographic trend in sexual size dimorphism and body size of Osteopilus septentrionalis (Cuban treefrog): implications for invasion of the southeastern United States. Biol. Invasions 11:1411-1420.
39. Panhuis, T. M., R. Butlin, M. Zuk, and T. Tregenza. 2001. Sexual selection and speciation. Trends Ecol. Evol. 16:364-371.
40. Parker, G. A. 1972a. Reproductive behaviour of Sepsis cynipsea (L.) (Diptera: Sepsidae) I. A preliminary analysis of the reproductive strategy and its associated behaviour patterns. Behaviour 41:172-206.
41. Parker, G. A. 1972b. Reproductive behaviour of Sepsis cynipsea (L.) (Diptera: Sepsidae) II. The significance of the precopulatory passive phase and emigration. Behaviour 41:242-250.
42. Pont, A. C., and R. Meier. 2002. The Sepsidae (Diptera) of Europe. Fauna Entomol. Scand. 37:1-221.
43. Preziosi, R. F., and D. J. Fairbairn. 2000. Lifetime selection on adult body size and components of body size in a waterstrider: opposing selection and maintenance of sexual size dimorphism. Evolution 54:558-566.
44. Price, T. D. 1984. The evolution of sexual dimorphism in Darwin's Finches. Am. Nat. 123, 500-518.
45. Puniamoorthy, N., K. Su Feng Yi, and R. Meier. 2008. Bending for love: losses and gains of sexual dimorphisms are strictly correlated with changes in the mounting position of sepsid flies (Sepsidae: Diptera). BMC Evol. Biol. 8:155.
46. Puniamoorthy, N., D. Tan, M. Ismail, and R. Meier. 2009. From kissing to belly stridulation: comparative analysis reveals surprising diversity, rapid evolution, and much homoplasy in the mating behavior of 27 species of sepsid flies (Diptera: Sepsidae). J. Evol. Biol. 22:2146-2156.
47. Ramos, M., J. A. Coddington, T. E. Christenson, and D. J. Irschick. 2005. Have male and female genitalia coevolved? A phylogenetic analysis of genitalic morphology and sexual size dimorphism in web-building spiders (Araneae: Araneoidea). Evolution 59:1989-1999.
48. Ritchie, M. G. 2007. Sexual selection and speciation. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 38:79-102.
49. Schauble, C. S. 2004. Variation in body size and sexual dimorphism across geographical and environmental space in the frogs Limnodynastes tasmaniensis and L. peronii. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 82:39-56.
50. Schluter, D., T. D. Price, and L. Rowe. 1991. Conflicting selection pressures and life-history trade-offs. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 246:11-17.
51. Schulz, K. S. 1999. The evolution of mating systems in black scavenger flies (Diptera: Sepsidae). Doctoral diss., University of Arizona, Tuscon, Arizona, USA.
52. Serrano-Meneses, M. A., A. Cordoba-Aguilar, V. Mendez, S. J. Layen, and T. Szekely. 2007. Sexual size dimorphism in the American rubyspot: male body size predicts male competition and mating success. Anim. Behav. 73:987-997.
53. SPSS Statistics. 2010. IBM SPSS Statistics version 19.0. SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA.
54. Stillwell, R. C., and C. W. Fox. 2007. Environmental effects on sexual size dimorphism of a seed-feeding beetle. Oecologia 153:273-280.
55. Stillwell, R. C., W. U. Blanckenhorn, T. Teder, G. Davidowitz, and C. W. Fox. 2010. Sex differences in phenotypic plasticity affect variation in sexual size dimorphism in insects: from physiology to evolution. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 55: 227-245.
56. Storz, J. F., J. Balasingh, H. R. Bhat, P. T. Nathan, D. P. S. Doss, A. A. Prakash, and T. H. Kunz. 2001. Clinal variation in body size and sexual dimorphism in an Indian fruit bat, Cynopterus sphinx (Chiroptera: Pteropodidae). Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 72:17-31.
57. Su, F. Y. K., S. Kutty, and R. Meier. 2008. Morphology versus Molecules: the phylogenetic relationships of Sepsidae (Diptera: Cyclorrhapha) based on morphology and DNA sequence data from ten genes. Cladistics 24:902-916.
58. Tammaru, T., T. Esperk, V. Ivanov, and T. Teder. 2010. Proximate sources of sexual size dimorphism in insects: locating constraints on larval growth schedules. Evol. Ecol. 24:161-175.
59. Tan, D., Y. Ang, G. Lim, M. Ibrahim, and R. Meier. 2010. From 'cryptic species' to integrative taxonomy: an iterative pro sequences, morphology, and behaviour leads to the resurrection of Sepsis pyrrhosoma (Sepsidae: Diptera). Zool. Scr. 39:51-61.
60. Teder, T., and T. Tammaru. 2005. Sexual size dimorphism within species increases with body size in insects. Oikos 108:321-334.
61. Teuschl, Y., and W. U. Blanckenhorn. 2007. The reluctant fly: what makes Sepsis cynipsea females willing to copulate? Anim. Behav. 73:85-97.
62. Teuschl, Y., C. Reim, and W. U. Blanckenhorn. 2007. Correlated responses to artificial body size selection in growth, development, phenotypic plasticity and juvenile viability in yellow dung flies. J. Evol. Biol. 20:87-103.
63. Teuschl, Y., C. Reim, and W. U. Blanckenhorn. 2010. No size-dependent reproductive costs in male black scavenger flies (Sepsis cynipsea). Behav. Ecol. 21:85-90.
64. Yu, B.-G., R.-Q. Zheng, Y. Zhang, and C.-T. Liu. 2010. Geographic variation in body size and sexual size dimorphism in the giant spiny frog Paa spinosa (David, 1875) (Anura: Ranoidae). J. Nat. Hist. 44:1729-1741.
65. Zerbe, F. 1993. Innerartliche Größenvariabilität und Paarungsverhalten bei Sepsis punctum (Fabricius, 1794) [Diptera, Sepsidae]. Diplomarbeit der Fakultät Biologie der Julius-Maximilians- Universität Würzburg.