Evolution of mate-harm, longevity and behaviour in male fruit flies subjected to different levels of interlocus conflict

BMC Evolutionary Biology

Volumn 13, Issue 1, 2013, Pages

  Nandy, Bodhisatta ^a   Gupta, Vanika ^a   Sen, Sharmi ^a   Udaykumar, Niveda ^b   Samant, Manas Arun ^a   Ali, Syed Zeeshan ^a   Prasad, Nagaraj Guru ^a  

^a INDIAN INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE EDUCATION AND RESEARCH MOHALI   (India)

^b ST JOSEPH S COLLEGE   (India)

Author keywords

Drosophila melanogaster; Experimental evolution; Intersexual conflict; Life span and aging; Mate harm

Indexed keywords

AGING; BEHAVIORAL RESPONSE; COURTSHIP; EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY; FEMALE; FLY; LIFE TABLE; LONGEVITY; MALE; MORTALITY; REPRODUCTION; SEX RATIO; SEXUAL CONFLICT;

DROSOPHILA MELANOGASTER;

ANIMAL; COURTSHIP; DROSOPHILA MELANOGASTER; EVOLUTION; FEMALE; LONGEVITY; MALE; PHENOTYPE; PHYSIOLOGY; REPRODUCTION; SEX RATIO; ARTICLE;

ANIMALS; BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION; COURTSHIP; DROSOPHILA MELANOGASTER; FEMALE; LONGEVITY; MALE; PHENOTYPE; REPRODUCTION; SEX RATIO;

EID: 84884631950     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14712148     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2148-13-212     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Sexual conflict. Chapman T, Arnqvist G, Bangham J, Rowe L, Trends Ecol Evol 2003 18 1 41 47 10.1016/S0169-5347(02)00004-6 (Pubitemid 36048852)
2. Adaptation versus pleiotropy: why do males harm their mates? Morrow E, Arnqvist G, Pitnick S, Behav Ecol 2003 14 802 806 10.1093/beheco/arg073 (Pubitemid 38126978)
3. Sperm competition and mate harm unresponsive to male-limited selection in Drosophila: an evolving genetic architecture under domestication. Jiang P-P, Bedhomme S, Prasad NG, Chippindale AK, Evolution 2011 65 2448 2460 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2011.01328.x 21884048
4. Sexual conflict in nonhuman animal. Koene J, The oxford handbook of sexual conflict in humans Oxford: Oxford University Press, Shackelford TK, Goetz AT, 2012 15 30
5. Arnqvist G, Rowe L, Sexual conflict Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press 2005
6. A cost of mating in female fruitflies. Fowler K, Partridge L, Nature 1989 338 760 761 10.1038/338760a0 (Pubitemid 19326170)
7. The cost of mating rises nonlinearly with copulation frequency in a laboratory population of Drosophila melanogaster. Kuijper B, Stewart AD, Rice WR, J Evol Biol 2006 19 1795 1802 10.1111/j.1420-9101.2006.01186.x 17040376 (Pubitemid 44571618)
8. Assessing sexual conflict in the Drosophila melanogaster laboratory model system. Rice WR, Stewart AD, Morrow EH, Linder JE, Orteiza N, Byrne P, Philos Trans R Soc London [Biol] 2006 361 287 299 10.1098/rstb.2005.1787 (Pubitemid 44870115)
9. Cost of mating in Drosophila melanogaster females is mediated by male accessory-gland products. Chapman T, Liddle LF, Kalb JM, Wolfner M, Partridge L, Nature 1995 373 241 244 10.1038/373241a0 7816137
10. Tokens of love: function and regulation of Drosophila male accessory gland products. Wolfner M, Insect Biochem Mol Biol 1997 27 179 192 10.1016/S0965-1748(96)00084-7 9090115 (Pubitemid 27120404)
11. Sexual conflict and the evolutionary ecology of mating patterns: water striders as a model system. Rowe L, Arnqvist G, Sih A, Krupa JJ, Trends Ecol Evol 1994 9 289 293 10.1016/0169-5347(94)90032-9 21236857 (Pubitemid 2106637)
12. Genital damage, kicking and early death: the battle of the sexes takes a sinister turn in the bean weevil. Crudgington HS, Siva-Jothi M, Nature 2000 407 855 856 10.1038/35038154 11057654
13. A new theory law. Van Valen L, Evolutionary Theory 1973 1 1 30
14. Ridley M, The red queen: sex and the evolution of human nature NY: Harper Collins Publishers 1993
15. Sexual conflict and life history. Wedell N, Kvarnemo C, Lessells CM, Tregenza T, Anim Behav 2006 71 999 1011 10.1016/j.anbehav.2005.06.023
16. Mate choice, sexual conflict, and Evolution of senescence. Promislow D, Behav Genet 2003 33 191 201 10.1023/A:1022562103669 14574152 (Pubitemid 36384237)
17. Sexual selection, sexual conflict and the evolution of aging and life span. Bonduriansky RA, Maklakov AA, Zajitschek MA, Brooks R, Funct Ecol 2008 22 443 453 10.1111/j.1365-2435.2008.01417.x (Pubitemid 351703929)
18. Intergenomic conflict, interlocus antagonistic co-evolution, and the evolution of reproductive isolation. Rice WR, Endless forms: species and speciation Oxford: Oxford University Press, Howard DJ, Berlocher SH, 1997 261 270
19. Speciation and sexual conflict. Gavrilets S, Hayashi T, Evol Ecol 2005 19 167 198 10.1007/s10682-004-7916-4 (Pubitemid 41279645)
20. The evolution of reproductive isolation through sexual conflict. Martin OY, Hosken DJ, Nature 2003 423 979 982 10.1038/nature01752 12827200 (Pubitemid 36806911)
21. Inter-locus antagonistic coevolution as an engine of speciation: assessment with hemiclonal analysis. Rice WR, Linder JE, Friberg U, Lew TA, Morrow EH, Stewart AD, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2005 102 6527 6534 10.1073/pnas.0501889102 15851669 (Pubitemid 40628300)
22. Experimental removal of sexual selection reverses intersexual antagonistic coevolution and removes a reproductive load. Holland B, Rice WR, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1999 96 5083 5088 10.1073/pnas.96.9.5083 10220422 (Pubitemid 29214539)
23. Males' evolutionary response to experimental removal of sexual selection. Pitnick S, Miller GT, Reagan J, Holland B, Proc R Soc Lond B 2001 268 1071 1080 10.1098/rspb.2001.1621 (Pubitemid 32500481)
24. Costs and benefits of evolving under experimentally enforced polyandry or monogamy. Martin OY, Hosken DJ, Evolution 2003 57 2765 2772 14761055 (Pubitemid 38078357)
25. Experimental removal and elevation of sexual selection: does sexual selection generate manipulative males and resistant females? Crudgington HS, Beckerman A, Brustle L, Green K, Snook RR, Am Nat 2005 165 72 S87 10.1086/429353 15795864 (Pubitemid 40561140)
26. Sexual conflict selects for male and female reproductive characters. Hosken DJ, Garner TWJ, Ward PI, Curr Biol 2001 11 1 20 11166173
27. Evolutionary reduction in testes size and competitive fertilization success in response to the experimental removal of sexual selection in dung beetles. Simmons LW, Garcia-Gonzalez F, Evolution 2008 62 2580 2591 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2008.00479.x 18691259
28. Sexually antagonistic male adaptations triggered by experimental arrest of female evolution. Rice WR, Nature 1996 381 232 234 10.1038/381232a0 8622764
29. Male fitness increases when females are eliminated from gene pool: implications for the Y chromosome. Rice WR, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1998 95 6217 6221 10.1073/pnas.95.11.6217 9600945 (Pubitemid 28248992)
30. An evolutionary cost of separate genders revealed by male-limited evolution. Prasad NG, Bedhomme S, Day T, Chippindale AK, Am Nat 2007 169 29 37 10.1086/509941 17206582 (Pubitemid 46095010)
31. Female resistance to male harm evolves in response to manipulation of sexual conflict. Wigby S, Chapman T, Evolution 2004 58 1028 1037 15212383 (Pubitemid 38673790)
32. No evidence that experimental manipulation of sexual conflict drives premating reproductive isolation in Drosophila melanogaster. Wigby S, Chapman T, J Evol Biol 2006 19 1033 1039 10.1111/j.1420-9101.2006.01107.x 16780504
33. Ejaculate depletion patterns evolve in response to experimental manipulation of sex ratio in Drosophila melanogaster. Linklater JR, Wertheim B, Wigby S, Chapman T, Evolution 2007 61 2027 2034 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2007.00157.x 17683443 (Pubitemid 47220937)
34. Experimental evolution exposes female and male responses to sexual selection and conflict in Tribolium castaneum. Michalczyk L, Millard AL, Martin OY, Lumley AJ, Emerson B, Gage MJG, Evolution 2011 65 713 724 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2010.01174.x 21091981
35. Sexual selection affects lifespan and aging in a beetle. Maklakov AA, Fricke C, Arnqvist G, Aging Cell 2007 6 739 744 10.1111/j.1474-9726.2007.00333.x 17725688 (Pubitemid 350131042)
36. Sexual selection did not contribute to the evolution of male lifespan under curtailed age at reproduction in a seed beetle. Maklakov AA, Fricke C, Ecol Entomol 2009 34 638 643 10.1111/j.1365-2311.2009.01113.x
37. Sperm competitive ability evolves in response to experimental alteration of operational sex ratio. Nandy B, Chakraborty P, Gupta V, Ali SZ, Prasad NG, Evolution 2013 67 2133 2141 10.1111/evo.12076 23815666
38. Y chromosome polymorphism is a strong determinant of male fitness in Drosophila melanogaster. Chippindale AK, Rice WR, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2001 98 5677 5682 10.1073/pnas.101456898 11320221 (Pubitemid 32435701)
39. Adult locomotory activity mediates intralocus sexual conflict in a laboratory-adapted population of Drosophila melanogaster. Long TAF, Rice WR, Proc R Soc Lond B 2007 274 3105 3112 10.1098/rspb.2007.1140 (Pubitemid 350220154)
40. The courtship of Drosophila melanogaster. Bostock M, Manning A, Behaviour 1955 8 85 111 10.1163/156853955X00184
41. Experience improves courtship in male fruit flies. Dukas R, Anim Behav 2005 69 1203 1209 10.1016/j.anbehav.2004.08.012 (Pubitemid 40588797)
42. Reproductive behaviour evolves rapidly when intralocus sexual conflict is removed. Bedhomme S, Prasad NG, Jiang P-P, Chippindale AK, PLoS ONE 2008 3 5 2187 10.1371/journal.pone.0002187 18478127
43. Increased opportunity for sexual conflict promotes harmful males with elevated courtship frequencies. Crudgington HS, Fellows S, Snook RR, J Evol Biol 2009 23 440 446 20039999
44. Plastic response of male Drosophila melanogaster to the level of sperm competition increase male reproductive fitness. Bretman A, Fricke C, Chapman T, Proc R Soc Lond B 2009 276 1705 1711 10.1098/rspb.2008.1878
45. Exposure to rivals and plastic response to sperm competition in Drosophila melanogaster. Bretman A, Fricke C, Hetherington P, Stone A, Chapman T, Behav Ecol 2010 21 317 321 10.1093/beheco/arp189
46. Reproductive behavior and fitness components in male Drosophila melaogaster are nonlinearly affected by the number of male co-inhabitants early in adult life. Nandy B, Prasad NG, J Insect Sci 2011 11 67 21867434
47. Male genotype affects female longevity in Drosophila melanogaster. Sawby R, Hughes KA, Evolution 2001 55 834 839 10.1554/0014-3820(2001)055[0834:MGAFLI] 2.0.CO;2 11392401 (Pubitemid 32464107)
48. Chromosomal effect on male and female components of sperm precedence in Drosophila melanogaster. Civetta A, Clark AC, Genet Res 2000 75 143 151 10.1017/S0016672399004292 10816972 (Pubitemid 30204291)
49. Harm to females increases with male body size in Drosophila melanogaster. Pitnick S, Garcia-Gonzalez F, Proc R Soc Lond B 2002 269 1821 1828 10.1098/rspb.2002.2090 (Pubitemid 35015036)
50. Experimentally enforced monogamy: inadvertent selection, inbreeding, or evidence for sexually antagonistic coevolution? Rice WR, Holland B, Evolution 2005 59 682 685 15856709 (Pubitemid 40441333)
51. Assessing the potential for an ongoing arms race within and between the sexes: selection and heritable variation. Friberg U, Lew T, Byrne PG, Rice WR, Evolution 2005 59 1540 1551 16153039 (Pubitemid 41098444)
52. Aggression in harlequin frogs: male-male competition and a possible conflict of interest between the sexes. Crump ML, Anim Behav 1988 36 1064 1077 10.1016/S0003-3472(88)80066-6
53. Crow JF, Kimura M, An introduction to population genetics theory NY: Harper and Row 1970
54. Adaptation to experimental alterations of the operational sex ratio in populations of Drosophila melanogaster. Reuter M, Linklater JR, Lehmann L, Fowler K, Chapman T, Hurst GDD, Evolution 2008 62 401 412 10.1111/j.1558-5646. 2007.00300.x 17999720 (Pubitemid 351294563)
55. A test and review of the role of effective population size on experimental sexual selection patterns. Snook RR, Brustle L, Slate J, Evolution 2009 63 1923 1933 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2009.00682.x 19473403
56. Laboratory evolution of postponed senescence in Drosophila melanogaster. Rose MR, Evolution 1984 38 1004 1010 10.2307/2408434
57. Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ, Biometry NY: W.H. Freeman and Company 3 1995 238 240