Female stickleback prefer shallow males: Sexual selection on nest microhabitat

Evolution

Volumn 69, Issue 6, 2015, Pages 1643-1653

  Bolnick, Daniel I ^a   Shim, Kum Chuan ^a   Brock, Chad D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

Author keywords

Extended phenotype; Gasterosteus aculeatus; Mate choice; Microgeographic variation; Opportunity for selection; Threespine stickleback

Indexed keywords

FISH; HABITAT USE; HERITABILITY; MATE CHOICE; MICROHABITAT; NESTING SUCCESS; PHENOTYPE; SEX-RELATED DIFFERENCE; SEXUAL SELECTION; SPATIAL VARIATION;

BRITISH COLUMBIA; CANADA;

GASTEROSTEUS; GASTEROSTEUS ACULEATUS;

ANATOMY AND HISTOLOGY; ANIMAL; BODY SIZE; BRITISH COLUMBIA; ECOSYSTEM; FEMALE; LAKE; MALE; MATE CHOICE; NESTING; PHYSIOLOGY; REPRODUCTION; SMEGMAMORPHA;

ANIMALS; BODY SIZE; BRITISH COLUMBIA; ECOSYSTEM; FEMALE; LAKES; MALE; MATING PREFERENCE, ANIMAL; NESTING BEHAVIOR; REPRODUCTION; SMEGMAMORPHA;

EID: 84931575959     PISSN: 00143820     EISSN: 15585646     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/evo.12682     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Ahnesjö, J., and A. Forsman. 2006. Differential habitat selection by pigmy grasshopper color morphs; interactive effects of temperature and predator avoidance. Evol. Ecol. 20:235-257.
2. Albert, A. Y. K. 2005. Mate choice, sexual imprinting, and speciation: a test of a one-allele isolating mechanism in sympatric sticklebacks. Evolution 59:927-931.
3. Bakker, T. C. M., and B. Mundwiler. 1994. Female mate choice and male red coloration in a natural three-spined stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus). Behav. Ecol. 5:74-80.
4. Barber, I., S. A. Arnott, V. A. Braithwaite, J. Andrew, and F. A. Huntingford. 2001. Indirect fitness consequences of mate choice in sticklebacks: offspring of brighter males grow slowly but resist parasitic infections. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 268:71-76.
5. Barfield, M. and R. D. Holt. 2008. Habitat selection and niche conservatism. Isr. J. Ecol. Evol. 54:295-309.
6. Baube, C. L., W. J. Rowland, and J. B. Fowler. 1995. The mechanisms of color-based mate choice in female threespone sticklebacks: hue, contrast, and configurational cues. Behavior 132:979-996.
7. Bolnick, D. I., and S. Otto. 2013. The magnitude of local adaptation under genotype-dependent dispersal. Ecol. Evol. 3:4733-4735
8. Bolnick, D. I., C. D. Brock, K. S. Shim, and M. Schmerer. Population-specific covariation between immune function, sexual signals, and microhabitat in male threespine stickleback. PLoS One: In press.
9. Bourke, P., P. Magnan, and M. A. Rodriquez. 1997. Individual variations in habitat use and morphology in brook charr. J. Fish Biol. 51:783-794.
10. Cubillos, E. R., and H. E. Guderley. 2000. Analysis of the factors related with mate choice and reproductive success in male three-spined sticklebacks. J. Fish Biol. 56:1201-1216.
11. Davis, J., and J. A. Stamps. 2004. The effect of natal experience on habitat preferences. Trends Ecol. Evol. 19:411-416.
12. Day, T., J. Pritchard, and D. Schluter. 1994. A comparison of two sticklebacks. Evolution 48:1723-1734.
13. Edelaar, P., A. M. Siepielski, and J. Clobert. 2008. Matching habitat choice causes directed gene flow: a neglected dimension in evolution and ecology. Evol. 62:2462-2472.
14. Ehlinger, T. J. 1990. Habitat choice and phenotype-limited feeding efficiency in bluegill: individual differences and trophic polymorphism. Ecology 71:886-896.
15. Eizaguirre, C., T. L. Lenz, R. D. Sommerfeld, C. Harrod, M. Kalbe, and M. Milinski. 2010. Parasite diversity, patterns of MHC II variation and olfactory based mate choice in diverging three-spined stickleback ecotypes. Evol. Ecol. 25:605-622.
16. Flamarique, I. N., C. Bergstrom, C. L. Cheng, and T. E. Reimchen. 2013. Role of the iridescent eye in stickleback female mate choice. J. Exp. Biol. 216:2806-2812.
17. Folstad, I., A. M. Hope, A. Karter, and A. Skorping. 1994. Sexually selected color in male sticklebacks-a signal of both parasite exposure and parasite resistance. Oikos 69:511-515.
18. Frischknecht, M. 1993. The breeding colouration of male three-spined sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus) as an indicator of energy investment in vigour. Evol. Ecol. 7:439-450.
19. Haberli, M. A., and P. B. Aeschlimann. 2004. Male traits influence odour-based mate choice in the three-spined stickleback. J. Fish Biol. 64:702-710.
20. Han, X., Z. Li, C. Hui, and F. Zhang. 2006. Polymorphism maintenance in a spatially structured population: a two-locus genetic model of niche construction. Ecol. Model. 192:160-174.
21. Hunter, P. 2009. Extended phenotype redux. EMBO Rep. 10:212-215.
22. Jaenike, J., and R. D. Holt. 1991. Genetic variation for habitat preference: evidence and explanations. Am. Nat. 137:S67-S90.
23. Kolbe, J. J., and F. J. Janzen. 2002. Impact of nest-site selection on nest success and nest temperature in natural and disturbed habitats. Ecology 83:269-281.
24. Kraak, S. B. M., T. C. M. Bakker, and B. Mundwiler. 1999. Sexual selection in sticklebacks in the field: correlates of reproductive, mating, and paternal success. Behav. Ecol. 10:696-706.
25. Krakauer, A. H., M. S. Webster, E. H. Duval, A. G. Jones, and S. M. Schuster. 2011. The opportunity for sexual selection: not mismeasured, just misunderstood. J. Evol. Biol. 24:2064-2071.
26. Lackey, A. C. R., and J. W. Boughman. 2014. Female discrimination against heterospecific mates does not depend on mating habitat. Behav. Ecol. 25:1256-1267.
27. Martin, T. E. 1998. Are microhabitat preferences of coexisting species under selection and adaptive? Ecology 79:656-670.
28. Mayhew, P. J. 1997. Adaptive patterns of host-plant selection by phytophagous insects. Oikos 79:417-428.
29. McPhail, J. D. 1993. Ecology and evolution of sympatric sticklebacks (Gasterosteus): origin of the species pairs. Can. J. Zool. 71:515-523.
30. McPhail, J. D. 1994. Speciation and the evolution of reproductive isolation in the sticklebacks (Gasterosteus) in south-western British Columbia. Pp. 399-437 in M. A. Bell, and S. A. Foster, eds. The evolutionary biology of the threespine stickleback. Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, U. K.
31. Milinski, M. 2003. The function of mate choice in sticklebacks: optimizing MHC genetics. J. Fish Biol. 63(Suppl. A):1-16.
32. Milinski, M., and T. C. M. Bakker. 1990. Female sticklebacks use male coloration in mate choice and hence avoid parasitized males. Nature 344:330-333.
33. Miller, C. W., and E. I. Svensson. 2014. Sexual selection in complex environments. Ann. Rev. Entomol. 59:427-445.
34. Misenhelter, M. D., and J. T. Rotenberry. 2000. Choices and consequences of habitat occupancy and nest site selection in sage sparrows. Ecology 81:2892-2901.
35. Mitchell, T. S., D. A. Warner, and F. J. Janzen. 2013. Phenotypic and fitness consequences of maternal nest-site choice across multiple early life stages. Ecology 94:336-345.
36. Mori, S. 1993. The breeding system of the three-spined stickleback, Gasterosteus aculeatus (Forma Leiura) with reference to spatial and temporal patterns of nesting activity. Behaviour 126:97-124.
37. Mori, S. 1995. Spatial and temporal variations in nesting success and the causes of nesting losses of the freshwater three-spined stickleback, Gasterosteus aculeatus. Environ. Biol. Fishes 43:323-328.
38. Moorad, J. A., and M. J. Wade. 2013. Selection gradients, the opportunity for selection, and the coefficient of determination. Am. Nat. 181:291-300.
39. Nosil, P., B. J. Crespi, C. P. Sandoval, and M. Kirkpatrick. 2006. Migration and the genetic covariance between habitat preference and performance. Am. Nat. 167:E66-E78.
40. Odling-Smee, F. J., K. N. Laland, and M. W. Feldman. 1996. Niche construction. Am. Nat. 147:641-648.
41. Rafferty, N. E., and J. W. Boughman. 2006. Olfactory mate recognition in a sympatric species pair of three-spined sticklebacks. Behav. Ecol. 17:965-970.
42. Rausher, M. D. 1984. The evolution of habitat preference in subdivided populations. Evolution 38:596-608.
43. Ravigné, V., I. Olivieri, and U. Dieckmann. 2004. Implications of habitat choice for protected polymorphisms. Evol. Ecol. Res. 6:125-145.
44. Ravigné, V., U. Dieckmann, and I. Olivieri. 2009. Live where you thrive: joint evolution of habitat choice and local adaptation facilitates specialization and promotes diversity. Am. Nat. 174:E141-E169.
45. Reimchen, T. E. 1989. Loss of nupital color in threespine sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus). Evolution 43:450-460.
46. Rice, W. R. 1984. Disruptive selection on habitat preference and the evolution of reproductive isolation: a simulation study. Evolution 38:1251-1260.
47. Rice, W. R., and G. W. Salt. 1988. Speciation via disruptive selection on habitat preference: experimental evidence. Am. Nat. 131:911-917.
48. Richardson, J. L., M. C. Urban, D. I. Bolnick, and D. K. Skelly. 2014. Microgeographic adaptation and the spatial scale of evolution. Trends Ecol. Evol. 29:165-176.
49. Schaedelin, F. C., and M. Taborsky. 2009. Extended phenotypes as signals. Biol. Rev. 84:293-313.
50. Snowberg, L. K., and D. I. Bolnick. 2008. Assortative mating by diet in a phenotypically unimodal but ecologically variable population of stickleback. Am. Nat. 172:733-739.
51. Snowberg, L. K. 2012. Disentangling spatial segregation and assortative mating in threespine stickleback. Evolution 66:3582-3594.
52. Southcott, L., L. Nagel, T. Hatfield, and D. Schluter. 2013. Weak habitat isolation in a threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus spp.) species pair. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 110:433-476.
53. Taff, C. C., C. R. Freeman-Gallant, P. O. Dunn, and L. A. Whittingham. 2013. Spatial distribution of nests constrains the strength of sexual selection in a warbler. J. Evol. Biol. 26:1392-1405.
54. Thompson, J. N. 2005. The geographic mosaic of coevolution. Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
55. Via, S. 1986. Genetic covariance between oviposition preference and larval performance in an insect herbivore. Evolution 40:778-785.
56. Via, S., and D. J. Hawthorne. 2002. The genetic architecture of ecological specialization: correlated gene effects on host use and habitat choice in a pea aphids. Am. Nat. 159:S76-S88.
57. Via, S., A. C. Bouck, and S. Skillman. 2000. Reproductive isolation between divergent races of pea aphids on two hosts. II. Selection against migrants and hybrids in the parental environments. Evolution 54:1626-1637.
58. Vines, T. H., and D. Schluter. 2006. Strong assortative mating between allopatric sticklebacks as a by-product of adaptation to different environments. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 273:911-916.
59. Whitlock, M. C. 2005. Combining probability from independent tests: the weighted Z-method is superior to Fisher's approach. J. Evol. Biol. 18:1368-1373.
60. Wilson, D. S. 1998. Nest-site selection: microhabitat variation and its effects on the survival of turtle embryos. Ecology 79:1884-1892.