The role of ecology in speciation by sexual selection: A systematic empirical review

Journal of Heredity

Volumn 105, Issue S1, 2014, Pages 782-794

  Scordato, Elizabeth S C ^a   Symes, Laurel B ^b,d   Mendelson, Tamra C ^c   Safran, Rebeca J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

^b Dartmouth College   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE COUNTY   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MILWAUKEE   (United States)

Author keywords

ecology; natural selection; reproductive isolation; sexual selection; speciation; trait divergence

Indexed keywords

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; CONFERENCE PAPER; ECOLOGY; GENE INTERACTION; GENETIC ASSOCIATION; GENETIC TRAIT; GENETIC VARIABILITY; MATE CHOICE; NATURAL SELECTION; NONHUMAN; SEXUAL SELECTION; SPECIES DIFFERENTIATION; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (TOPIC); TAXONOMY; AMPHIBIA; ANIMAL; BIRD; ECOSYSTEM; FEMALE; GENETIC SELECTION; MALE; MAMMAL; META ANALYSIS; MOLLUSC; MULTIFACTORIAL INHERITANCE; REPTILE;

AMPHIBIANS; ANIMALS; BIRDS; ECOLOGY; ECOSYSTEM; FEMALE; GENETIC SPECIATION; MALE; MAMMALS; MATING PREFERENCE, ANIMAL; MOLLUSCA; MULTIFACTORIAL INHERITANCE; REPTILES; SELECTION, GENETIC;

EID: 84913554321     PISSN: 00221503     EISSN: 14657333     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/jhered/esu037     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (54)

1. Bailey NW,Moore AJ. 2012. Runaway sexual selection without genetic correlations: social environments and flexible mate choice initiate and enhance the Fisher process. Evolution. 66,2674-2684.
2. Bolnick DI, Fitzpatrick BM. 2007. Sympatric speciation: models and empirical evidence. Ann Rev Ecol Evol Syst. 38:459-487.
3. Bonachea LA, Ryan MJ. 2011. Simulated predation risk influences female choice in Tungara frogs. Ethology. 26:130-140.
4. Boughman JW. 2001. Divergent sexual selection enhances reproductive isolation in sticklebacks. Nature. 411:944-948.
5. Boughman JW, Rundle HD, Schluter D. 2005. Parallel evolution of sexual isolation in sticklebacks. Evolution. 59(2):361-373.
6. Bro-Jø rgensen J. 2010. Dynamics of multiple signalling systems: animal communication in a world in flux. Trends Ecol Evol. 25:292-300.
7. Candolin U. 2003. The use of multiple cues in mate choice. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 78:575-595.
8. Coyne JA, Orr HA. 2004. Speciation. Sunderland (MA): Sinauer Associates. Crawley, MJ. 2012. The R book. Chicester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, 2012.
9. Drè s M, Mallet J. 2002. Host races in plant-feeding insects and their importance in sympatric speciation. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 357:471-492.
10. Grace JL, Shaw KL. 2012. Incipient sexual isolation in Laupala cerasina: females discriminate population-level divergence in acoustic characters. Curr Zool. 58:416-425.
11. Gray DA, Cade WH. 2000. Sexual selection and speciation in field crickets. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 97:14449-14454.
12. Haesler MP, Seehausen O. 2005. Inheritance of female mating preference in a s ympatric sibling species pair of Lake Victoria cichlids: implications for speciation. Proc Biol Sci. 272:237-245.
13. Hankison SJ, Morris MR. 2003. Avoiding a compromise between sexual selection and species recogni tion: female swordtail fish assess multiple species-specific cues. Behav Ecol. 14:282-287.
14. Henry CS, Wells MLM. 2004. Adaptation or random change? The evolutionary response of songs to substrate properties in lacewings. Neuroptera: Chrysopidae: Chrysoperla. Anim Behav. 68:879-895.
15. Hey J. 2006. Recent advances in assessing gene flow between diverging populations and species. Curr Opin Genet Dev. 16:592-596.
16. Hoekstra HE, Hoekstra JM, Berrigan D, Vignieri SN, Hoang A, Hill CE, Beerli P, Kingsolver JG. 2001. Strength and tempo of directional selection in the wild. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 98:9157-9160.
17. Kolm N, Amcoff M, Mann RP, Arnqvist G. 2012. Diversification of a foodmimicking male ornament via sensory drive. Curr Biol. 22:1440-1443.
18. Kraaijeveld K, Kraaijeveld-Smit FJ, Maan ME. 2011. Sexual selection and speciation: the comparative evidence revisited. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 86:367-377.
19. Kronforst MR, Young LG, Gilbert LE. 2007. Reinforcement of mate preference among hybridizing Heliconius butterflies. J Evol Biol. 20:278-285.
20. Lande R. 1981. Models of speciation by sexual selection on polygenic traits. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 78:3721-3725.
21. Lange rhans RB, Riesch R. 2013. Speciation by selection: a framework for understanding ecology's role in speciation. Curr Zool. 59:31-52.
22. Leal M,Fleishman LJ. 2004. Differences in visual signal design and detectability between allopatric populations of Anolis lizards. Am Nat. 163, 26-39.
23. Maan ME, Seehausen O. 2010. Mechanisms of species divergence through visual adaptation and sexual selection: Perspectives from a cichlid model system. Curr Zool. 56:285-299.
24. Maan ME, Seehausen O. 2011. Ecology, sexual selection and speciation. Ecol Lett. 14:591-602.
25. Marie Curie SPECIATION Network, Butlin R, Debelle A, Kerth C, Snook RR, Beukeboom LW, Castillo Cajas RF, Diao W, Maan ME, Paolucci S, et al. 2012. What do we need to know about speciation. Trends Ecol Evol. 27:27-39.
26. Matsubayashi KW, Kahono S, Katakura H. 2011. Divergent host plant specialization as the critical driving force in speciation between populations of a phytophagous ladybird beetle. J Evol Bi ol. 24:1421-1432.
27. Muñ oz AG, Salazar C, Castaño J, Jiggins CD, Linares M. 2010. Multiple sources of reproductive isolation in a bimodal butterfly hybrid zone. J Evol Biol. 23:1312-1320.
28. Nosil P, Crespi BJ, Sandoval CP. 2002. Host-plant adaptation drives the parallel evolution of reproductive isolation. Nature. 417:440-443.
29. Nosil P. 2012. Ecological speciation. Oxf ord: Oxford University Press.
30. Oh KP,Fergus DJ,Grace JL,Shaw KL.,2012.Interspecific genetics of speciation phenotypes: song and preference coevolution in Hawaiian crickets J Evol Biol.2(5), 1500-1512.
31. Panhuis TM, Butlin R, Zuk M, Tregenza T. 2001. Sexual selection and speciation. Trends Ecol Evol. 16:364-371.
32. Peterson MA, Honchak BM, Locke SE, Beeman TE, Mendoza J, Green J, Buckingham KJ, White MA, Monsen KJ. 2005. Relative abundance and the species-specific reinforcement of male mating preference in the Chrysochus (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) hybrid zone. Evolution. 59:2639-2655.
33. Plenderleith M, van Oosterhout C, Robinson RL, Turner GF. 2005. Female preference for conspecific males based on olfactory cues in a Lake Malawi cichlid fish. Biol Lett. 1:411-414.
34. Price T. 2008. Speciation in birds. Boulder (CO): Roberts. Qvarnström A. 2001. Context-dependent genetic benefits from mate choice. Trends Ecol Evol. 16:5-7.
35. Ritchie MG. 2007. Sexual selection and speciation. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst. 38:79-102.
36. Rova E, Bjö rklund M. 2011. Can preference for oviposition sites initiate reproductive isolation in Callosobruchus maculatus? PLoS One. 6:e14628.
37. Rull J, Tadeo E, Aluja M, Guillen L, Egan SP, Feder JL. 2012. Hybridization and sequential components of reproductive isolation between parapatric walnut-infesting sister species Rhagoletis completa and Rhagoletis zoqui. Biol J Linn Soc. 107:8 86-898.
38. Saetre GP, Krá l K, Bures S, Ims RA. 1999. Dynamics of a clinal hybrid zone and a comparison with island hybrid zones of flycatchers. Ficedula hypoleuca and F. albicollis. J Zool. 247:53-64.
39. Safran RJ, Flaxman S, Kopp M, Irwin DE, Briggs D, Evans MR, Funk WC, Gray DA, Hebets EA, Seddon N, et al. 2012. A robust new metric of phenotypic distance to estimate and compare multiple trait differences among population s. Curr Zool. 58:423-436.
40. Safran RJ, Scordato ES, Symes LB, Rodrí guez RL, Mendelson TC. 2013. Contributions of natural and sexual selection to the evolution of premating reproductive isolation: a research agenda. Trends Ecol Evol. 28:643-650.
41. Schluter D. 2009. Evidence for e cological speciation and its alternative. Science. 323:737-741.
42. Seddon N, Botero CA, Tobias JA, Dunn PO, Macgregor HE, Rubenstein DR, Uy JA, Weir JT, Whittingham LA, Safran RJ. 2013. Sexual selection accelerates signal evolution during speciation in birds. Proc Biol Sci. 280:20131065.
43. Seehausen O, Van Alphen JJ. 1998. The effect of male coloration on female mate choice in closely related Lake Victoria cichlids. Haplochromis nyererei complex. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 42:1-8.
44. Seehausen O, Van Alphen JJ, Witte F. 1997. Cichlid fish diversity threatened by eutrophication that curbs sexual selection. Science. 277:1808-1811.
45. Servedio MR,Noor M.A., 2003. The role of reinforcement in speciation: theory and data. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst. 34, 339-364.
46. Siepielski AM, DiBattista JD, Evans JA, Carlson SM. 2011. Differences in the temporal dynamics of phenotypic selection among fitness components in the wild. Proc Biol Sci. 278:1572-1580.
47. Smadja CM, Butlin RK. 2011. A framework for comparing processes of speciation in the presence of gene flow. Mol Ecol. 20:5123-5140.
48. Svensson EI, Waller JT. 2013. Ecology and sexual selection: evolution of wing pigmentation in calopterygid damselflies in relation to latitude, sexual dimorphism, and speciation. Am Nat. 182:E174-E195.
49. Tregenza T. 2002. Divergence and reproductive isolation in the early stages of speciation. Genetica. 116:291-300.
50. van der Sluijs I, Van Alphen JJ, Seehausen O. 2008. Preference polymorphism for coloration but no speciation in a population of Lake Victoria cichlids. Behav Ecol. 19:177-183.
51. van Doorn GS, Edelaar P, W eissing FJ. 2009. On the origin of species by natural and sexual selection. Science. 326:1704-1707.
52. Velema GJ, Rosenfeld JS, Taylor EB. 2012. Effects of invasive American signal crayfish. Pacifast acus leniusculus. On the reproductive behaviour of threespine stickleback. Gasterosteus aculeatus. Sympatric species pairs. Can J Zool. 90:1328-1338.
53. Williams TH, Mendelson TC. 2013. Male and female responses to species-specific coloration in darters. Percidae: Etheostoma. Anim Behav. 85:1251-1259.
54. Yukilevic h R, True JR. 2006. Divergent outcomes of reinforcement speciation: the relative importance of assortative mating and migration modification. Am Nat. 167:638-654.