Inbreeding avoidance, tolerance, or preference in animals?

Trends in Ecology and Evolution

Volumn 28, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 205-211

  Szulkin, Marta ^a,b   Stopher, Katie V ^c   Pemberton, Josephine M ^c   Reid, Jane M ^d  

^a CENTRE D ECOLOGIE FONCTIONNELLE ET EVOLUTIVE   (France)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Inbreeding avoidance; Inbreeding preference; Inbreeding strategy; Inclusive fitness; Mate choice; Relatedness

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL COMMUNITY; EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS; INBREEDING AVOIDANCE; INCLUSIVE FITNESS; MATE CHOICE; MATING BEHAVIOR; RELATEDNESS; SELECTION;

ANIMAL; ANIMAL DISPERSAL; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; INBREEDING; MATE CHOICE; REVIEW;

ANIMAL DISTRIBUTION; ANIMALS; INBREEDING; MATING PREFERENCE, ANIMAL; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL;

ANIMALIA;

EID: 84875517229     PISSN: 01695347     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tree.2012.10.016     Document Type: Review

References (75)

1. Charlesworth B., Charlesworth D. The genetic basis of inbreeding depression. Genet. Res. 1999, 74:329-340.
2. Keller L.F., Waller D.M. Inbreeding effects in wild populations. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2002, 17:230-241.
3. Blouin S.F., Blouin M. Inbreeding avoidance behaviours. Trends Ecol. Evol. 1988, 3:230-233.
4. Bretman A., et al. Molecular evidence of post-copulatory inbreeding avoidance in the field cricket Gryllus bimaculatus. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B: Biol. Sci. 2004, 271:159-164.
5. Pusey A., Wolf M. Inbreeding avoidance in animals. Trends Ecol. Evol. 1996, 11:201-206.
6. Brouwer L., et al. Strategic promiscuity helps avoid inbreeding at multiple levels in a cooperative breeder where both sexes are philopatric. Mol. Ecol. 2011, 20:4796-4807.
7. Tregenza T., Wedell N. Polyandrous females avoid costs of inbreeding. Nature 2002, 415:71-73.
8. Billing A.M., et al. Evidence of inbreeding depression but not inbreeding avoidance in a natural house sparrow population. Mol. Ecol. 2012, 21:1487-1499.
9. Nelson-Flower M.J., et al. Inbreeding avoidance mechanisms: dispersal dynamics in cooperatively breeding southern pied babblers. J. Anim. Ecol. 2012, 81:876-883.
10. Charlesworth D. Evolution of plant breeding systems. Curr. Biol. 2006, 16:R726-R735.
11. Jamieson I.G., et al. Why some species of birds do not avoid inbreeding: insights from New Zealand robins and saddlebacks. Behav. Ecol. 2009, 20:575-584.
12. Kokko H., Ots I. When not to avoid inbreeding. Evolution 2006, 60:467-475.
13. Lehmann L., Perrin N. Inbreeding avoidance through kin recognition: choosy females boost male dispersal. Am. Nat. 2003, 162:638-652.
14. Arct A., et al. Kin recognition and adjustment of reproductive effort in zebra finches. Biol. Lett. 2010, 6:762-764.
15. Lemaitre J.F., et al. Inbreeding avoidance behaviour of male bank voles in relation to social status. Anim. Behav. 2012, 83:453-457.
16. Rioux-Paquette E., et al. No inbreeding avoidance in an isolated population of bighorn sheep. Anim. Behav. 2010, 80:865-871.
17. Szulkin M., et al. Inbreeding avoidance under different null models of random mating in the great tit. J. Anim. Ecol. 2009, 78:778-788.
18. Thunken T., et al. Active inbreeding in a cichlid fish and its adaptive significance. Curr. Biol. 2007, 17:225-229.
19. Lebigre C., et al. Female-biased dispersal alone can reduce the occurrence of inbreeding in black grouse (Tetrao tetrix). Mol. Ecol. 2010, 19:1929-1939.
20. Pärt T. Problems with testing inbreeding avoidance: the case of the collared flycatcher. Evolution 1996, 50:1625-1630.
21. Szulkin M., Sheldon B.C. Dispersal as a means of inbreeding avoidance in a wild bird population. Proc. R. Soc. B: Biol. Sci. 2008, 275:703-711.
22. Pusey A.E. Sex-biased dispersal and inbreeding avoidance in birds and mammals. Trends Ecol. Evol. 1987, 2:295-299.
23. Keller L.F., Arcese P. No evidence for inbreeding avoidance in a natural population of song sparrows (Melospiza melodia). Am. Nat. 1998, 152:380-392.
24. Hill W.G., Weir B.S. Prediction of multi-locus inbreeding coefficients and relation to linkage disequilibrium in random mating populations. Theor. Popul. Biol. 2007, 72:179-185.
25. Fisher R.A. Average excess and average effect of a gene substitution. Ann. Eugen. 1941, 11:53-63.
26. Lande R., Schemske D.W. The evolution of self-fertilization and inbreeding depression in plants. 1. Genetic models. Evolution 1985, 39:24-40.
27. Goodwillie C., et al. The evolutionary enigma of mixed mating systems in plants: occurrence, theoretical explanations, and empirical evidence. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 2005, 36:47-79.
28. Parker G.A. Sexual selection and sexual conflict. Sexual Selection and Reproductive Competition in Insects 1979, 123-166. Academic Press. M.S. Blum, N.A. Blum (Eds.).
29. Smith R.H. Selection for inbreeding in polygynous animals. Heredity 1979, 43:205-211.
30. Geffen E., et al. Kin encounter rate and inbreeding avoidance in canids. Mol. Ecol. 2011, 20:5348-5358.
31. Bretman A., et al. Promiscuous females avoid inbreeding by controlling sperm storage. Mol. Ecol. 2009, 18:3340-3345.
32. Tregenza T., Wedell N. Genetic compatibility, mate choice and patterns of parentage: invited review. Mol. Ecol. 2000, 9:1013-1027.
33. Puurtinen M., et al. Mate choice for optimal (k)inbreeding. Evolution 2011, 65:1501-1505.
34. Waser P.M., et al. When should animals tolerate inbreeding?. Am. Nat. 1986, 128:529-537.
35. Parker G.A. Sexual conflict over mating and fertilization: an overview. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B: Biol. Sci. 2006, 361:235-259.
36. Young A.G., et al. Non-additive effects of pollen limitation and self-incompatibility reduce plant reproductive success and population viability. Ann. Bot. 2012, 109:643-653.
37. Ala-Honkola O., et al. No evidence for postcopulatory inbreeding avoidance in Drosophila melanogaster. Evolution 2011, 65:2699-2705.
38. Alho J.S., et al. No evidence for inbreeding avoidance through active mate choice in red-billed gulls. Behav. Ecol. 2012, 23:672-675.
39. Hadfield J.D., et al. Towards unbiased parentage assignment: combining genetic, behavioural and spatial data in a Bayesian framework. Mol. Ecol. 2006, 15:3715-3730.
40. Wang J.L. Effects of genotyping errors on parentage exclusion analysis. Mol. Ecol. 2010, 19:5061-5078.
41. Double M.C., et al. Exclusion probabilities for single-locus paternity analysis when related males compete for matings. Mol. Ecol. 1997, 6:1155-1166.
42. Keller L.F. Inbreeding and its fitness effects in an insular population of song sparrows (Melospiza melodia). Evolution 1998, 52:240-250.
43. Gasparini C., Pilastro A. Cryptic female preference for genetically unrelated males is mediated by ovarian fluid in the guppy. Proc. R. Soc. B: Biol. Sci. 2011, 278:2495-2501.
44. Wang C., Lu X. Female ground tits prefer relatives as extra-pair partners: driven by kin-selection?. Mol. Ecol. 2011, 20:2851-2863.
45. Foerster K., et al. A spatial genetic structure and effects of relatedness on mate choice in a wild bird population. Mol. Ecol. 2006, 15:4555-4567.
46. Hansson B., et al. No evidence for inbreeding avoidance in a great reed warbler population. Behav. Ecol. 2007, 18:157-164.
47. Soulsbury C.D., et al. Restrictive mate choice criteria cause age-specific inbreeding in female black grouse, Tetrao tetrix. Anim. Behav. 2012, 83:1497-1503.
48. Sardell R.J., et al. Comprehensive paternity assignment: genotype, spatial location and social status in song sparrows, Melospiza melodia. Mol. Ecol. 2010, 19:4352-4364.
49. Robinson S.P., et al. Assortative mating for relatedness in a large naturally occurring population of Drosophila melanogaster. J. Evol. Biol. 2012, 25:716-725.
50. Reid J.M., et al. Individual phenotype, kinship, and the occurrence of inbreeding in song sparrows. Evolution 2008, 62:887-899.
51. Stopher K.V., et al. Re-mating across years and intralineage polygyny are associated with greater than expected levels of inbreeding in wild red deer. J. Evol. Biol. 2012, 25:2457-2469.
52. Varian-Ramos C.W., Webster M.S. Extrapair copulations reduce inbreeding for female red-backed fairy-wrens, Malurus melanocephalus. Anim. Behav. 2012, 83:857-864.
53. Hansson B., et al. Do female great reed warblers seek extra-pair fertilizations to avoid inbreeding?. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B: Biol. Sci. 2004, 271:S290-S292.
54. Szulkin M., et al. Inbreeding depression along a life-history continuum in the great tit. J. Evol. Biol. 2007, 20:1531-1543.
55. Wang J., Santure A.W. Parentage and sibship inference from multilocus genotype data under polygamy. Genetics 2009, 181:1579-1594.
56. Ewing S.R., et al. Inbreeding and loss of genetic variation in a reintroduced population of Mauritius kestrel. Conserv. Biol. 2008, 22:395-404.
57. Csillery K., et al. Performance of marker-based relatedness estimators in natural populations of outbred vertebrates. Genetics 2006, 173:2091-2101.
58. Blouin M.S. DNA-based methods for pedigree reconstruction and kinship analysis in natural populations. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2003, 18:503-511.
59. Frere C.H., et al. Inbreeding tolerance and fitness costs in wild bottlenose dolphins. Proc. R. Soc. B: Biol. Sci. 2010, 277:2667-2673.
60. Chapman J.R., et al. A quantitative review of heterozygosity-fitness correlations in animal populations. Mol. Ecol. 2009, 18:2746-2765.
61. Szulkin M., et al. Heterozygosity-fitness correlations: a time for reappraisal. Evolution 2010, 64:1202-1217.
62. Wang J.L. Do marker-based paternity assignments favour heterozygous and unrelated males?. Mol. Ecol. 2010, 19:1898-1913.
63. Wetzel D.P., Westneat D.F. Heterozygosity and extra-pair paternity: biased tests result from the use of shared markers. Mol. Ecol. 2009, 18:2010-2021.
64. Hill W.G., Weir B.S. Variation in actual relationship as a consequence of Mendelian sampling and linkage. Genet. Res. 2011, 93:47-64.
65. Shutler D., et al. Breeding between tree swallows from the same brood. J. Field Ornithol. 2004, 75:353-358.
66. Szulkin M., et al. Promiscuity, inbreeding and dispersal propensity in great tits. Anim. Behav. 2012, 84:1363-1370.
67. Szulkin M., Sheldon B.C. Correlates of the occurrence of inbreeding in a wild bird population. Behav. Ecol. 2008, 19:1200-1207.
68. Rousset F. Inbreeding and relatedness coefficients: what do they measure?. Heredity 2002, 88:371-380.
69. Wang J. Unbiased relatedness estimation in structured populations. Genetics 2011, 187:887-901.
70. Thomas S.C. The estimation of genetic relationships using molecular markers and their efficiency in estimating heritability in natural populations. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B. 2005, 360:1457-1467.
71. Milligan B.G. Maximum-likelihood estimation of relatedness. Genetics 2003, 163:1153-1167.
72. Wang J.L. An estimator for pairwise relatedness using molecular markers. Genetics 2002, 160:1203-1215.
73. Lynch M., Ritland K. Estimation of pairwise relatedness with molecular markers. Genetics 1999, 152:1753-1766.
74. Queller D.C., Goodnight K.F. Estimating relatedness using genetic markers. Evolution 1989, 43:258-275.
75. Bink M.C.A.M., et al. Comparison of marker-based pairwise relatedness estimators on a pedigreed plant population. Theor. Appl. Genet. 2008, 117:843-855.