Sexual selection on Drosophila serrata male pheromones does not vary with female age or mating status

Journal of Evolutionary Biology

Volumn 27, Issue 6, 2014, Pages 1279-1286

  Gershman, S ^a,b,c   Delcourt, M ^a,d   Rundle, H D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

^b OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c The Ohio State University at Marion   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO   (United States)

Author keywords

Cuticular hydrocarbons; Mate choice; Preference function; Sexual display; Sexual selection

Indexed keywords

FLY; GENE EXPRESSION; MATE CHOICE; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; SEX PHEROMONE; SEX-RELATED DIFFERENCE; SEXUAL SELECTION;

SEX PHEROMONE;

ANIMAL; DECISION MAKING; DROSOPHILA; FEMALE; MALE; MATE CHOICE; PHYSIOLOGY; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; TIME;

ANIMALS; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; DROSOPHILA; FEMALE; MALE; MATING PREFERENCE, ANIMAL; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SEX ATTRACTANTS; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 84901481095     PISSN: 1010061X     EISSN: 14209101     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/jeb.12407     Document Type: Article

References (67)

1. Atchison, J. 1986. The Statistical Analysis of Compositional Data. Chapman and Hall, London.
2. Basolo, A.L. 1998. Evolutionary change in a receiver bias: a comparison of female preference functions. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 265: 2223-2228.
3. Bergman, M., Gotthard, K. & Wiklund, C. 2011. Mate acquisition by females in a butterfly: the effects of mating status and age on female mate-locating behavior. Anim. Behav. 81: 225-229.
4. Blows, M.W. & Allan, R.A. 1998. Levels of mate recognition within and between two Drosophila species and their hybrids. Am. Nat. 152: 826-837.
5. Blows, M.W. & Brooks, R. 2003. Measuring Nonlinear Selection. Am. Nat. 162: 815-820.
6. Blows, M.W., Chenoweth, S.F. & Hine, E. 2004. Orientation of the genetic variance-covariance matrix and the fitness surface for multiple male sexually selected traits. Am. Nat. 163: 329-340.
7. Brodie, E.D. III, Moore, A.J. & Janzen, F.J. 1995. Visualizing and quantifying natural selection. Trends Ecol. Evol. 10: 313-318.
8. Byers, J.A., Wiseman, P.A., Jones, L. & Roffe, T.J. 2005. A large cost of female mate sampling in pronghorn. Am. Nat. 166: 661-668.
9. Candolin, U. 2003. The use of multiple cues in mate choice. Biol. Rev. Camb. Philos. Soc. 78: 575-595.
10. Chenoweth, S.F. & Blows, M.W. 2003. Signal trait sexual dimorphism and mutual sexual selection in Drosophila serrata. Evolution 57: 2326-2334.
11. Chenoweth, S.F. & Blows, M.W. 2005. Contrasting mutual sexual selection on homologous signal traits in Drosophila serrata. Am. Nat. 165: 281-289.
12. Chenoweth, S.F. & Blows, M.W. 2006. Dissecting the complex genetic basis of mate choice. Nat. Rev. Genet. 7: 681-692.
13. Chenoweth, S.F., Rundle, H.D. & Blows, M.W. 2008. Genetic constraints and the evolution of display trait sexual dimorphism by natural and sexual selection. Am. Nat. 171: 22-34.
14. Chenoweth, S.F., Hunt, J. & Rundle, H.D. 2012. Analysing and comparing the geometry of individual fitness surfaces. In: The Adaptive Landscape in Evolutionary Biology (E.I. Svensson & R. Calsbeek, eds), pp. 126-149. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
15. Cotton, S., Small, J. & Pomiankowski, A. 2006. Sexual selection and condition-dependent mate preferences. Curr. Biol. 16: R755-R765.
16. Darwin, C. 1871. The Decent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex. John Murray, London.
17. Delcourt, M. & Rundle, H.D. 2011. Condition dependence of a multicomponent sexual display trait in Drosophila serrata. Am. Nat. 177: 812-823.
18. Delcourt, M., Blows, M.W. & Rundle, H.D. 2009. Sexually antagonistic genetic variance for fitness in an ancestral and a novel environment. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 276: 2009-2014.
19. Delcourt, M., Blows, M.W. & Rundle, H.D. 2010. Quantitative genetics of female mate preferences in an ancestral and a novel environment. Evolution 64: 2758-2766.
20. Delcourt, M., Blows, M.W., Aguirre, J.D. & Rundle, H.D. 2012. Evolutionary optimum for male sexual traits characterized using the multivariate Robertson-Price Identity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 109: 10414-10419.
21. Draper, N.R. & John, J.A. 1988. Response surface designs for quantitative and qualitative variables. Technometrics 30: 423-428.
22. Dukas, R. 2005. Learning affects mate choice in female fruit flies. Behav. Ecol. 16: 800-804.
23. Dukas, R., Durisko, Z. & Dukas, L. 2012. Learning in the context of sexual behaviour and danger in female and male Drosophila pseudoobscura. Anim. Behav. 83: 95-101.
24. Endler, J.A. & Houde, A.E. 1995. Geographic variation in female preferences for male traits in Poecilia reticulata. Evolution 49: 456-468.
25. Fairbairn, D.J. & Preziosi, R.F. 1996. Sexual selection and the evolution of sexual size dimorphism in the water strider, Aquarius remigis. Evolution 50: 1549-1559.
26. Fleischman, R.R. & Sakaluk, S.K. 2004. Sexual conflict over remating in house crickets: no evidence of an anti-aphrodisiac in males' ejaculates. Behaviour 141: 633-646.
27. Frentiu, F.D. & Chenoweth, S.F. 2008. Polyandry and paternity skew in natural and experimental populations of Drosophila serrata. Mol. Ecol. 17: 1589-1596.
28. Gabor, C.R. & Halliday, T.R. 1997. Sequential mate choice by multiply mating smooth newts: females become more choosy. Behav. Ecol. 8: 162-166.
29. Gray, D.A. 1999. Intrinsic factors affecting female choice in house crickets: time cost, female age, nutritional condition, body size, and size-relative reproductive investment. J. Insect Behav. 12: 691-700.
30. Hedrick, A.V. & Dill, L.M. 1993. Mate choice by female crickets is influenced by predation risk. Anim. Behav. 46: 193-196.
31. Hine, E., Lachish, S., Higgie, M. & Blows, M.W. 2002. Positive genetic correlation between female preference and offspring fitness. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 269: 2215-2219.
32. Hine, E., Chenoweth, S.F. & Blows, M.W. 2004. Multivariate quantitative genetics and the lek paradox: genetic variance in male sexually selected traits of Drosophila serrata under field conditions. Evolution 58: 2754-2762.
33. Hine, E., McGuigan, K. & Blows, M.W. 2011. Natural selection stops the evolution of male attractiveness. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 108: 3659-3664.
34. Hoffmann, A.A. 1987. A laboratory study of male territoriality in the sibling species Drosophila melanogaster and Drosophila simulans. Anim. Behav. 35: 807-818.
35. Hoikkala, A., Crossley, S. & Castillo-Melendez, C. 2000. Copulatory Courtship in Drosophila birchii and D. serrata, species recognition and sexual selection. J. Insect Behav. 13: 361-373.
36. Houde, A.E. 1994. Effect of artificial selection on male color patterns on mating preference of female guppies. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 256: 125-130.
37. Howard, R.W., Jackson, L.L., Banse, H. & Blows, M.W. 2003. Cuticular hydrocarbons of Drosophila birchii and D. serrata: identification and role in mate choice in D. serrata. J. Chem. Ecol. 29: 961-976.
38. Judge, K.A. 2010. Female social experience affects the shape of sexual selection on males. Evol. Ecol. Res. 12: 389-402.
39. Judge, K.A., Tran, K.-C. & Gwynne, D.T. 2010. The relative effects of mating status and age on the mating behaviour of female field crickets. Can. J. Zool. 88: 219-223.
40. Kingsolver, J.G., Hoekstra, H.E., Hoekstra, J.M., Berrigan, D., Vignieri, S.N., Hill, C.E. et al. 2001. The strength of phenotypic selection in natural populations. Am. Nat. 157: 245-261.
41. Knell, R.J. & Webberley, K.M. 2004. Sexually transmitted diseases of insects: distribution, evolution, ecology and host behaviour. Biol. Rev. 79: 557-581.
42. Kodric-Brown, A. & Nicoletto, P.F. 2001. Age and experience affect female choice in the guppy (Poecilia reticulata). Am. Nat. 157: 316-323.
43. Koudele, K., Stout, J.F. & Reichert, D. 1987. Factors which influence female crickets' (Acheta domesticus) phonotactic and sexual responsiveness to males. Physiol. Entomol. 12: 67-80.
44. Lande, R. & Arnold, S.J. 1983. The measurement of selection on correlated characters. Evolution 37: 1210-1226.
45. Leopold, R.A., Terranova, A.C. & Swilley, E.M. 1971. Mating refusal in Musca domestica: effects of repeated mating and decerebration upon frequency and duration of copulation. J. Exp. Zool. 176: 353-359.
46. Lynch, K.S., Rand, A.S., Ryan, M.J. & Wilczynski, W. 2005. Plasticity in female mate choice associated with changing reproductive states. Anim. Behav. 69: 689-699.
47. Mair, J. & Blackwell, A. 1998. Effect of age and multiple mating on the mating behavior of Culicoides nubeculosus (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae). J. Med. Entomol. 35: 996-1001.
48. Mautz, B.S. & Sakaluk, S.K. 2008. The effects of age and previous mating experience on pre- and post-copulatory mate choice in female house crickets (Acheta domesticus L.). J. Insect Behav. 21: 203-212.
49. Milinski, M. & Bakker, T.C.M. 1992. Costs influence sequential mate choice in sticklebacks, Gasterosteus aculeatus. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 250: 229-233.
50. Moore, P.J. & Moore, A.J. 2001. Reproductive aging and mating: the ticking of the biological clock in female cockroaches. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 98: 9171-9176.
51. Ortigosa, A. & Rowe, L. 2003. The role of mating history and male size in determining mating behaviours and sexual conflict in a water strider. Anim. Behav. 65: 851-858.
52. Pomiankowski, A. 1987. The costs of choice in sexual selection. J. Theor. Biol. 128: 195-218.
53. Reynolds, J.D. & Gross, M.R. 1990. Costs and benefits of female mate choice: is there a lek paradox. Am. Nat. 136: 230-243.
54. Ritchie, M.G. 1996. The shape of female mating preferences. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 93: 14628-14631.
55. Ritchie, M.G., Saarikettu, M. & Hoikkala, A. 2005. Variation, but no covariance, in female preference functions and male song in a natural population of Drosophila montana. Anim. Behav. 70: 849-854.
56. Rundle, H.D. & Chenoweth, S.F. 2011. Stronger convex (stabilizing) selection on homologous sexual display traits in females than in males: a multi-population comparison in Drosophila serrata. Evolution 65: 893-899.
57. Rundle, H.D., Chenoweth, S.F., Doughty, P. & Blows, M.W. 2005. Divergent selection and the evolution of signal traits and mating preferences. PLoS Biol. 3: 1988-1995.
58. Rundle, H.D., Chenoweth, S.F. & Blows, M.W. 2006. The roles of natural and sexual selection during adaptation to a novel environment. Evolution 60: 2218-2225.
59. Rundle, H.D., Chenoweth, S.F. & Blows, M.W. 2008. Comparing complex fitness surfaces: among-population variation in mutual sexual selection in Drosophila serrata. Am. Nat. 171: 443-454.
60. Rundle, H.D., Chenoweth, S.F. & Blows, M.W. 2009. The diversification of mate preferences by natural and sexual selection. J. Evol. Biol. 22: 1608-1615.
61. Sall, J., Creighton, L. & Lehman, A. 2005. JMP Start Statistics. Brooks/Cole, The SAS Institute, USA, Thomson.
62. Sheldon, B.C. 1993. Sexually-transmitted disease in birds - occurrence and evolutionary significance. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B. 339: 491-497.
63. Sztepanacz, J. & Rundle, H.D. 2012. Reduced genetic variance among high fitness individuals: inferring stabilizing selection on male sexual displays in Drosophila serrata. Evolution 66: 3101-3110.
64. Thomas, M.L. & Simmons, L.W. 2010. Cuticular hydrocarbons influence female attractiveness to males in the Australian field cricket, Teleogryllus oceanicus. J. Evol. Biol. 23: 707-714.
65. Uetz, G.W. & Norton, S. 2007. Preference for male traits in female wolf spiders varies with the choice of available males, female age and reproductive state. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 61: 631-641.
66. Wagner, W.E. 1998. Measuring female mating preferences. Anim. Behav. 55: 1029-1042.
67. Wagner, W.E., Murray, A.-M. & Cade, W.H. 1995. Phenotypic variation in the mating preferences of female field crickets, Gryllus integer. Anim. Behav. 49: 1269-1281.