Sex-specific evolutionary potential of pre- And postcopulatory reproductive interactions in the field cricket, teleogryllus commodus

Evolution

Volumn 67, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 1831-1837

  Hall, Matthew D ^a   Lailvaux, Simon P ^b   Brooks, Robert C ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BASEL   (Switzerland)

^b University of New Orleans   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

Author keywords

Genetic correlations; Heritability; Interacting phenotypes; Sexual conflict; Sexual selection

Indexed keywords

COEVOLUTION; COPULATION; CORRELATION; CRICKET; EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY; GENOTYPE; HERITABILITY; MATE CHOICE; PHENOTYPE; SEXUAL CONFLICT; SEXUAL SELECTION;

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BREEDING; COPULATION; FEMALE; GENETIC VARIABILITY; GENETICS; GRYLLIDAE; MALE; MATE CHOICE; MOLECULAR EVOLUTION; PHENOTYPE; REACTION TIME; SEX DIFFERENCE;

ANIMALS; BREEDING; COPULATION; EVOLUTION, MOLECULAR; FEMALE; GENETIC VARIATION; GRYLLIDAE; MALE; MATING PREFERENCE, ANIMAL; PHENOTYPE; REACTION TIME; SEX FACTORS;

GRYLLINAE; TELEOGRYLLUS COMMODUS;

EID: 84878626995     PISSN: 00143820     EISSN: 15585646     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/evo.12067     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Andersson, M. 1994. Sexual selection. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, NJ.
2. Arnqvist, G., and L. Rowe . 2005. Sexual conflict. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, NJ.
3. Bacigalupe, L. D., H. S. Crudgington, J. Slate, A. J. Moore, and R. R. Snook . 2008. Sexual selection and interacting phenotypes in experimental evolution: a study of Drosophila pseudoobscura mating behavior. Evolution 62:1804-1812.
4. Becker, W. A. 1992. Manual of quantitative genetics. 5ed ed. Academic Enterprises, Pullman, WA.
5. Bentsen, C. L., J. Hunt, M. D. Jennions, and R. Brooks . 2006. Complex multivariate sexual selection on male acoustic signaling in a wild population of Teleogryllus commodus. Am. Nat. 167:102-116.
6. Bergsma, R., E. Kanis, E. F. Knol, and P. Bijma . 2008. The contribution of social effects to heritable variation in finishing traits of domestic pigs (Sus scrofa). Genetics 178:1559-1570.
7. Bijma, P., W. M. Muir, E. D. Ellen, J. B. Wolf, and J. A. M. Van Arendonk . 2007. Multilevel selection 2: estimating the genetic parameters determining inheritance and response to selection. Genetics 175:289-299.
8. Blows, M. W. 2007. A tale of two matrices: multivariate approaches in evolutionary biology. J. Evol. Biol. 20:1-8.
9. Brommer, J. E., and K. Rattiste . 2008. "Hidden" reproductive conflict between mates in a wild bird population. Evolution 62:2326-2333.
10. Brooks, R., J. Hunt, M. W. Blows, M. J. Smith, L. F. Bussière, and M. D. Jennions . 2005. Experimental evidence for multivariate stabilizing sexual selection. Evolution 59:871-880.
11. Bussière, L. F., J. Hunt, M. D. Jennions, and R. Brooks . 2006. Sexual conflict and cryptic female choice in the black field cricket, Teleogryllus commodus. Evolution 60:792-800.
12. Butler, D. G., B. R. Cullis, A. R. Gilmour, and B. J. Gogel . 2009. ASReml-R reference manual: mixed models for S language environments. Queensland Government, Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
13. Fisher, R. A. 1930. The genetical theory of natural selection. Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford.
14. Hall, M. D., L. F. Bussière, M. Demont, P. I. Ward, and R. C. Brooks . 2010a. Competitive PCR reveals the complexity of postcopulatory sexual selection in Teleogryllus commodus. Mol. Ecol. 19:610-619.
15. Hall, M. D., L. F. Bussière, J. Hunt, and R. C. Brooks . 2008. Experimental evidence that sexual conflict influences the opportunity, form and intensity of sexual selection. Evolution 62:2305-2315.
16. Hall, M. D., S. P. Lailvaux, M. W. Blows, and R. C. Brooks . 2010b. Sexual conflict and the maintenance of multivariate genetic variation. Evolution 64:1697-1703.
17. Hunt, J., M. W. Blows, F. Zajitschek, M. D. Jennions, and R. Brooks . 2007. Reconciling strong stabilizing selection with the maintenance of genetic variation in a natural population of black field crickets (Teleogryllus commodus). Genetics 177:875-880.
18. Iwasa, Y., and A. Pomiankowski . 1999. Good parent and good genes models of handicap evolution. J. Theor. Biol. 200:97-109.
19. Jennions, M. D., and M. Petrie . 1997. Variation in mate choice and mating preferences: a review of causes and consequences. Biol. Rev. 72:283-327.
20. Kirkpatrick, M. 1996. Good genes and direct selection in the evolution of mating preferences. Evolution 50:2125-2140.
21. Kokko, H., R. Brooks, J. M. McNamara, and A. I. Houston . 2002. The sexual selection continuum. Proc. R. Soc. B. 269:1331-1340.
22. Lailvaux, S. P., M. D. Hall, and R. C. Brooks . 2010. Performance is no proxy for genetic quality: trade-offs between locomotion, attractiveness, and life history in crickets. Ecology 91:1530-1537.
23. Lessells, C. M. 2006. The evolutionary outcome of sexual conflict. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B. 361:301-317.
24. Loher, W., and B. Rence . 1978. The mating behavior of Teleogryllus commodus (Walker) and its central and peripheral control. Zeitschrift für Tierpsychologie 46:225-259.
25. Lynch, M., and B. Walsh . 1998. Genetics and analysis of quantitative traits. Sinauer Associates, Sutherland, MA.
26. McGlothlin, J. W., and E. D. Brodie III. 2009. How to measure indirect genetic effects: the congruence of trait-based and variance-partitioning approaches. Evolution 63:1785-1795.
27. Moore, A. J., E. D. Brodie III, and J. B. Wolf . 1997. Interacting phenotypes and the evolutionary process. I. Direct and indirect genetic effects of social interactions. Evolution 51:1352-1362.
28. Moore, A. J., and T. Pizzari . 2005. Quantitative genetic models of sexual conflict based on interacting phenotypes. Am. Nat. 165:S88-S97.
29. Muir, W. M. 2005. Incorporation of competitive effects in forest tree or animal breeding programs. Genetics 170:1247-1259.
30. Mutic, J. J., and J. B. Wolf . 2007. Indirect genetic effects from ecological interactions in Arabidopsis thaliana. Mol. Ecol. 16:2371-2381.
31. Parker, G. A. 1979. Sexual selection and sexual conflict. Pp. 123-166 in M. S. Blum and N. A. Blum, eds. Sexual selection and reproductive competition in insects. Academic Press, New York.
32. Petfield, D., S. F. Chenoweth, H. D. Rundle, and M. W. Blows . 2005. Genetic variance in female condition predicts indirect genetic variance in male sexual display traits. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 102:6045-6050.
33. Procter, D. S., A. J. Moore, and C. W. Miller . 2012. The form of sexual selection arising from male-male competition depends on the presence of females in the social environment. J. Evol. Biol. 25:803-812.
34. Shackleton, M. A., M. D. Jennions, and J. Hunt . 2005. Fighting success and attractiveness as predictors of male mating success in the black field cricket, Teleogryllus commodus: the effectiveness of no-choice tests. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 58:1-8.
35. Teplitsky, C., J. A. Mills, J. W. Yarrall, and J. Merilä . 2010. Indirect genetic effects in a sex-limited trait: the case of breeding time in red-billed gulls. J. Evol. Biol. 23:935-944.
36. Wilson, A. J., M. B. Morrissey, M. J. Adams, C. A. Walling, F. E. Guinness, J. M. Pemberton, T. H. Clutton-Brock, and L. E. B. Kruuk . 2011. Indirect genetics effects and evolutionary constraint: an analysis of social dominance in red deer, Cervus elaphus. J. Evol. Biol. 24:772-783.
37. Wolf, J. B. 2003. Genetic architecture and evolutionary constraint when the environment contains genes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 100:4655-4660.
38. Wolf, J. B., E. D. Brodie III, J. M. Cheverud, A. J. Moore, and M. J. Wade . 1998. Evolutionary consequences of indirect genetic effects. Trends. Ecol. Evol. 13:64-69.
39. Wolf, J. B., E. D. Brodie III, and A. J. Moore . 1999. Interacting phenotypes and the evolutionary process. II. Selection resulting from social interactions. Am. Nat. 153:254-266.