Asymmetric reproductive isolation and interference in neriid flies: The roles of genital morphology and behaviour

Animal Behaviour

Volumn 84, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 1331-1339

  Bath, Eleanor ^a   Tatarnic, Nikolai ^a   Bonduriansky, Russell ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

Author keywords

Combat; Genitalia; Hybridization; Mating behaviour; Neriidae; Reproductive interference; Reproductive isolation; Sexual competition; Telostylinus angusticollis; Telostylinus lineolatus

Indexed keywords

ASYMMETRIC COMPETITION; BEHAVIOR; BEHAVIORAL RESPONSE; FITNESS; FLY; REPRODUCTIVE ISOLATION; SEXUAL BEHAVIOR; SPECIES DIVERSITY; SYMPATRY;

AUSTRALIA;

NERIIDAE;

EID: 84870475668     PISSN: 00033472     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2012.08.025     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Andrade C., Vieira R., Ananina G., Klaczko L. Evolution of the male genitalia: morphological variation of the aedeagi in a natural population of Drosophila mediopunctata. Genetica 2008, 135:13-23.
2. Arbuthnott D., Elliot M., McPeek M., Crespi B. Divergent patterns of diversification in courtship and genitalic characters of Timema walking-sticks. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 2010, 23:1399-1411.
3. Avila F., Sirot L., LaFlamme B., Rubinstein C., Wolfner M. Insect seminal fluid proteins: identification and function. Annual Review of Entomology 2011, 56:21-40.
4. Ben-david T., Gerson U., Morin S. Asymmetric reproductive interference between two closely related spider mites: Tetranychus urticae and T. turkestani (Acari: Tetranychidae). Experimental & Applied Acarology 2009, 48:213-227.
5. Bonduriansky R. The evolution of male mate choice in insects: a synthesis of ideas and evidence. Biological Reviews 2001, 76:305-339.
6. Bonduriansky R. Convergent evolution of sexual shape dimorphism in Diptera. Journal of Morphology 2006, 267:602-611.
7. Bonduriansky R. The evolution of condition-dependent sexual dimorphism. American Naturalist 2007, 169:9-19.
8. Bonduriansky R. Condition dependence of developmental stability in the sexually dimorphic fly Telostylinus angusticollis (Diptera: Neriidae). Journal of Evolutionary Biology 2009, 22:861-872.
9. Cordoba-Aguilar A. Possible coevolution of male and female genital form and function in a calopterygid damselfly. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 2005, 18:132-137.
10. Coyne J., Orr H. Speciation 2004, Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts.
11. Crampton W., Lovejoy N., Waddell J. Reproductive character displacement and signal ontogeny in a sympatric assemblage of electric fish. Evolution 2011, 65:1650-1666.
12. Crowder D., Sitvarin M., Carrière Y. Plasticity in mating behaviour drives asymmetric reproductive interference in whiteflies. Animal Behaviour 2010, 79:579-587.
13. delBarco-Trillo J., Johnston R. Adult female hamsters require long and sustained exposures to heterospecific males to avoid interspecific mating. Evolutionary Ecology 2010, 25:391-401.
14. Eberhard W. Sexual Selection and Animal Genitalia 1985, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
15. Eberhard W. Reproductive behavior of Glyphidops flavifrons and Nerius plurivitatus (Diptera, Neriidae). Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 1998, 71:89-107.
16. Eberhard W., Ramirez N. Functional morphology of the male genitalia of four species of Drosophila: failure to confirm both lock and key and male-female conflict. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 2004, 97:1007-1017.
17. Enderlein G. Klassifikation der micropeziden. Archiv fur Naturgeschichte (A) 1922, 88:140-228.
18. Gröning J., Hochkirch A. Reproductive interference between animal species. Quarterly Review of Biology 2008, 83:257-282.
19. Hennig W. übersicht über die Arten der Neriiden und über die Zoogeographie dieser Acalyptraten-gruppe (Diptera). Stettiner Entomologische Zeitung 1937, 98:240-280.
20. Higgie M., Blows M. Are traits that experience reinforcement also under sexual selection?. American Naturalist 2007, 170:409-420.
21. Higgie M., Blows M. The evolution of reproductive character displacement conflicts with how sexual selection operates within a species. Evolution 2008, 62:1192-1203.
22. House C., Simmons L. Genital morphology and fertilization success in the dung beetle Onthophagus taurus: an example of sexually selected male genitalia. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 2003, 270:447-455.
23. Kawasaki N., Brassil Chad E., Brooks Robert C., Bonduriansky R. Environmental effects on the expression of life span and aging: an extreme contrast between wild and captive cohorts of Telostylinus angusticollis (Diptera: Neriidae). American Naturalist 2008, 172:346-357.
24. Kishi S., Nishida T., Tsubaki Y. Reproductive interference determines persistence and exclusion in species interactions. Journal of Animal Ecology 2009, 78:1043-1049.
25. Konuma J., Chiba S. Ecological character displacement caused by reproductive interference. Journal of Theoretical Biology 2007, 247:354-364.
26. van Lieshout E. Male genital length and mating status differentially affect mating behaviour in an earwig. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 2010, 65:149-156.
27. van Lieshout E., Elgar M. Longer exaggerated male genitalia confer defensive sperm-competitive benefits in an earwig. Evolutionary Ecology 2011, 25:351-362.
28. Marchini D., Bene G., Dallai R. Functional morphology of the female reproductive apparatus of Stephanitis pyrioides (Heteroptera, Tingidae): a novel role for the pseudospermathecae. Journal of Morphology 2009, 473-482.
29. Ryan M.J., Rand A.S. Species recognition and sexual selection as a unitary problem in animal communication. Evolution 1993, 47:647-657.
30. Shapiro A., Porter A. The lock-and-key hypothesis: evolutionary and biosystematic interpretation of insect genitalia. Annual Review of Entomology 1989, 34:231-245.
31. Sih A., Krupa J., Travers S. An experimental study on the effects of predation risk and feeding regime on the mating behavior of the water strider. American Naturalist 1990, 135:284-290.
32. Siva-Jothy M., Tsubaki Y. Variation in copulation duration in Mnais pruinosa pruinosa Selys (Odonata: Calopterygidae): 2. Causal factors. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 1989, 25:261-267.
33. Sota T., Kubota K. Genital lock-and-key as a selective agent against hybridization. Evolution 1998, 52:1507-1513.
34. Statistica (Data Analysis Software System). Version 7.1 2005, StatSoft, Inc., StatSoft, Inc, Tulsa, Oklahoma.
35. Takafuji A., Kuno E., Fujimoto H. Reproductive interference and its consequences for the competitive interactions between two closely related Panonychus spider mites. Experimental & Applied Acarology 1997, 21:379-391.
36. Takami Y. Experimental analysis of the effect of genital morphology on insemination success in the ground beetle Carabus insulicola (Coleoptera Carabidae). Ethology Ecology & Evolution 2003, 15:51-61.
37. Tanabe T., Sota T. Complex copulatory behavior and the proximate effect of genital and body size differences on mechanical reproductive isolation in the millipede genus Parafontaria. American Naturalist 2008, 171:692-699.
38. Thum R. Reproductive interference, priority effects and the maintenance of parapatry in Skistodiaptomus copepods. Oikos 2007, 116:759-768.
39. Vermette R., Fairbairn D. How well do mating frequency and duration predict paternity success in the polygynandrous water strider Aquarius remigis?. Evolution 2002, 56:1808-1820.
40. Verrell P. Is decreased frequency of mating among conspecifics a cost of sympatry in salamanders?. Evolution 1994, 48:921-925.
41. Wojcieszek J.M., Simmons L.W. Evidence for stabilizing selection and slow divergent evolution of male genitalia in a millipede (Antichiropus variabilis). Evolution 2012, 66:1138-1153.
42. Yasui Y. Adaptive control of copulation duration by males under sperm competition in the mite, Macrocheles muscaedomesticae. Experimental & Applied Acarology 1994, 18:543-554.