All Title Author
Keywords Abstract

PLOS ONE  2012 

Incestuous Sisters: Mate Preference for Brothers over Unrelated Males in Drosophila melanogaster

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0051293

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib


The literature is full of examples of inbreeding avoidance, while recent mathematical models predict that inbreeding tolerance or even inbreeding preference should be expected under several realistic conditions like e.g. polygyny. We investigated male and female mate preferences with respect to relatedness in the fruit fly D. melanogaster. Experiments offered the choice between a first order relative (full-sibling or parent) and an unrelated individual with the same age and mating history. We found that females significantly preferred mating with their brothers, thus supporting inbreeding preference. Moreover, females did not avoid mating with their fathers, and males did not avoid mating with their sisters, thus supporting inbreeding tolerance. Our experiments therefore add empirical evidence for inbreeding preference, which strengthens the prediction that inbreeding tolerance and preference can evolve under specific circumstances through the positive effects on inclusive fitness.


[1]  Charlesworth D, Charlesworth B (1987) Inbreeding depression and its evolutionary consequences. Ann Rev Ecol Systematics 18: 237–268.
[2]  Guevara-Fiore P, Rosenqvist G, Watt PJ (2010) Inbreeding level does not induce females discrimination between sibs and unrelated males in guppies. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 64: 1601–1607.
[3]  Thurin N, Aron S (2010) Sib-mating in the ant Plagiolepis pygmaea: adaptative inbreeding? J Evol Biol 22: 2481–2487.
[4]  Fox CW, Reed DH (2011) Inbreeding depression increases with environmental stress: an experimental study and meta-analysis. Evolution 65(1): 246–258.
[5]  Frankham R, Ballou JD, Briscoe DA (2002) Introduction to Conservation Genetics. University Press, Cambridge.
[6]  Swindell WR, Bouzat JL (2006) Reduced inbreeding depression due to historical inbreeding in Drosophila melanogaster: evidence for purging. J Evol Biol 19: 1257–1264.
[7]  Swindell WR, Bouzat JL (2006) Ancestral inbreeding reduces the magnitude of inbreeding depression in Drosophila melanogaster. Evolution 60(4): 762–767.
[8]  Blouin SF, Blouin M (1988) Inbreeding avoidance behaviors. Trends Ecol Evol 3: 230–233.
[9]  Pusey A, Wolf M (1996) Inbreeding avoidance in animals. Trends Ecol Evol 11: 201–206.
[10]  Koenig WD, Stanback MT, Haydock J (1999) Demographic consequences of incest avoidance in the cooperatively breeding acorn woodpecker. Anim Behav 57: 1287–1293.
[11]  Trezenga T, Wedell N (2000) Genetic compatibility, mate choice and patterns of parentage. Mol Ecol 9: 1013–1027.
[12]  Daniels SJ, Walters JR (2000) Inbreeding depression and its effects on natal dispersal in red-cockaded woodpeckers. Condor 102: 482–491.
[13]  Hatchwell BJ, Russell AF, Ross DJ, Fowlie MK (2000) Divorce in cooperatively breeding long-tailed tits: a consequence of inbreeding avoidance? Proc R Soc Lond B 267: 813–819.
[14]  Blomqvist D, Andersson M, Kupper C, Cuthill IC, Kis J, et al. (2002) Genetic similarity between mates and extra-pair parentage in three species of shorebirds. Nature 419: 613–615.
[15]  Freeman-Gallant CR, Meguerdichian M, Wheelwright NT, Sollecito SV (2003) Social pairing and female mating fidelity predicted by restriction fragment length polymorphism similarity at the major histocompatibility complex in a song bird. Mol Ecol 12: 3077–3083.
[16]  Olsson M, Madsen T, Nordbly J, Wapstra E, Ujvari B, et al. (2003) Major histocompatibility complex and mate choice in sand lizards. Proc. R. Soc. Lond B 270: S254–S256.
[17]  Kokko H, Ots I (2006) When not to avoid inbreeding. Evolution 60: 467–475.
[18]  Frommen JG, Bakker TCM (2006) Inbreeding avoidance through non-random mating in sticklebacks. Biol Lett 2: 232–235.
[19]  Gerlach G, Lysiak N (2006) Kin recognition and inbreeding avoidance in zebrafish, Danio rerio, is based on phenotype matching. Anim Behav 71: 1371–1377.
[20]  Wheelwright NT, Freeman-Gallant CR, Mauck RA (2006) Asymmetrical incest avoidance in the choice of social and genetic mates. Anim Behav 71: 631–639.
[21]  Hoffman JI, Forcada J, Trathan PN, Amos B (2007) Female fur seals show active choice for males that are heterozygous and unrelated. Nature 445: 912–914.
[22]  Lieberman D, Tooby J, Cosmides L (2007) The architecture of human kin detection. Nature 445: 727–731.
[23]  Mulard H, Danchin é, Talbot SL, Ramey AM, Hatch SA, et al. (2009) Evidence that pairing with genetically similar mates is maladaptative in a monogamous bird. BMC Evol Biol 9: 147.
[24]  Lihoreau M, Zimmer C, Rivault C (2010) Mutual mate choice: when it pays both sexes to avoid inbreeding. PLoS ONE 3: e3365.
[25]  Parker C (1979) Sexual selection and sexual conflict. In: Blum MS, Blum NA, editors. Sexual selection and reproductive competition in insects. New York Academic Press. 123–166.
[26]  Bateson P (1982) Preferences for cousins in Japanese quail. Nature 295: 236–237.
[27]  Bateson P (1983) Optimal outbreeding. In: Bateson P, editor. Mate choice. Cambridge University Press. 257–277.
[28]  Barnard CJ, Fitzsimons J (1988) Kin recognition and mate choice in mice – the effects of kinship, familiarity and social interference on intersexual interaction. Anim Behav 36: 1078–1090.
[29]  Keane B (1990) The effect of relateness on reproductive success and mate choice in the white-footed mouse, Peromyscus leucopus. Anim Behav 39: 264–273.
[30]  Puurtinen M (2011) Mate choice for optimal (k)inbreeding. Evolution 65: 1501–1505.
[31]  Hamilton WD (1964) Genetical evolution of social behaviour I. J Theor Biol. 7: 1–52.
[32]  Hansson B, Jack L, Christians JK, Pemberton JM, Akesson M, et al. (2007) No evidence for inbreeding avoidance in a great reed warbler population. Behav Ecol 18: 157–164.
[33]  Holand O, Askim KR, R?ed KH, Weladji RB, Gj?stein H, et al. (2007) No evidence of inbreeding avoidance in a polygynous ungulate: the reindeer (Rangifer tarandus). Biol Lett 3: 36–39.
[34]  De Luca PA, Cocroft RB (2008) The effects of age and relatedness on mating patterns in thornbug treehoppers: inbreeding avoidance or inbreeding tolerance? Behav Ecol Sociobiol 62: 1869–1875.
[35]  Edvardsson M, Rodriguez-Munoz R, Tregenza T (2008) No evidence that female bruchid beetles, Callosobruchus maculatus, use remating to reduce costs of inbreeding. Anim Behav 75: 1519–1524.
[36]  Jamieson IG, Taylor SS, Tracy LN, Kokko H, Armstrong DP (2009) Why some species of birds do not avoid inbreeding: insights from New Zealand robins and saddlebacks. Behav Ecol 20: 575–584.
[37]  Szulkin M, Zelazowski P, Nicholson G, Sheldon BC (2009) Inbreeding avoidance under different null models of random mating in the great tit. J Anim Ecol 78: 778–788.
[38]  Richard M, Losdat S, Lecomte J, de Fraipont M, Clobert J (2009) Optimal level of inbreeding in the common lizard. Proc R Soc Lond B 276: 2779–2786.
[39]  Frère CH, Krützen M, Kopps AM, Ward P, Mann J, et al. (2010) Inbreeding tolerance and fitness costs in wild bottlenose dolphins. Proc R Soc Lond B 277: 2667–2673.
[40]  Elias J, Dorn S, Mazzi D (2010) Inbreeding in a natural population of the gregarious parasitoid wasp Cotesia glomerata. Mol Ecol 19: 2336–2345.
[41]  Rioux-Paquette E, Festa-Bianchet M, Coltman DW (2010) No inbreeding avoidance in an isolated population of bighorn sheep. Anim Behav 80: 865–871.
[42]  Schj?rring S, J?ger I (2007) Incestuous mate preference by a simultaneous hermaphrodite with strong inbreeding depression. Evolution 61: 423–430.
[43]  Thünken T, Bakker TCM, Baldauf SA, Kullmann H (2007) Active inbreeding in a cichlid fish and its adaptive significance. Curr Biol 17: 225–229.
[44]  Robinson SP, Kennington WJ, Simmons LW (2012) Assortative mating for relatedness in a large naturally occurring population of Drosophila melanogaster. J Evol Biol 25: 716–725.
[45]  Reid JM, Arcese P, Keller LF (2006) Intrinsic parent-offspring correlation in inbreeding level in a song sparrow (Melospiza melodia) population open to immigration. Am Nat 168: 1–13.
[46]  Jones B, Clark AG (2003) Bayesian sperm competition estimates. Genetics 163: 1193–1199.
[47]  Mack PD, Hammock BA, Promislow DEL (2002) Sperm competitive ability and genetic relatedness in Drosophila melanogaster: similarity breeds contempt. Evolution 56: 1789–1795.
[48]  Clark AG, Begun DJ, Prout T (1999) Female x male interactions in Drosophila sperm competition. Science 283: 217–220.
[49]  Ala-Honkola O, Manier MK, Lupold S, Pitnick S (2011) No evidence for postcopulatory inbreeding avoidance in Drosophila melanogaster. Evolution 65: 2699–2705.
[50]  Loyau A, Blanchet S, Van Laere P, Clobert J, Danchin é (2012) When not to copy: female fruit flies use sophisticated public information to avoid mated males. Sci Rep 2: 768.
[51]  Méry F, Varela SAM, Danchin é, Blanchet S, Parejo D, et al. (2009) Public versus personal information for mate choice copying in an invertebrate. Curr Biol 19: 1–15.
[52]  Narraway C, Hunt J, Wedell N, Hosken DJ (2010) Genotype-by-environment interactions for female preference. J Evol Biol 23: 2550–2557.
[53]  Yew JY, Dreisewerd K, Luftmann H, Müthing J, Pohlentz G, et al. (2009) A new male sex pheromone and novel cuticular cues for chemical communication in Drosophila. Curr Biol 19: 1245–1254.
[54]  Partridge L, Ewing A, Chandler A (1987) Male size and mating success in Drosophila melanogaster: the roles of male and female behaviour. Anim Behav 35: 555–562.
[55]  Tomaru M, Oguma Y (2000) Mate choice in Drosophila melanogaster and D. sechellia: criteria and their variation depending on courtship song. Anim Behav 60: 797–804.
[56]  Ahuja A, Singh RS (2008) Variation and evolution of male sex combs in Drosophila: nature of selection response and theories of genetic variation for sexual traits. Genetics 179: 503–509.
[57]  Schielzeth H, Burger C, Bolund E, Forstmeier W (2008) Assortative versus disassortative mating preferences of female zebra finches based on self-referent phenotype matching. Anim Behav 76: 1927–1934.
[58]  Kuo T-H, Yew JY, Fedina TY, Dreisewerd K, et al. (2012) Aging modulates cuticular hydrocarbons and sexual attractiveness in Drosophila melanogaster. J Exp Biol 215: 814–821.
[59]  Mack PD, Lester VK, Promislow DEL (2000) Age-specific effects of novel mutations in Drosophila melanogaster – II. Fecundity and male mating ability. Genetica 110: 31–41.
[60]  Ruedi EA, Hughes KA (2009) Age, but not experience, affects courtship gene expression in male Drosophila melanogaster. PLoS ONE 4(7): e6150.
[61]  Robinson SP, Kennington WJ, Simmons LW (2009) No evidence for optimal fitness at intermediate levels of inbreeding in Drosophila melanogaster. Biol J Lin Soc 98: 501–510.
[62]  Sharp PM (1984) The effect of inbreeding on competitive male-mating ability in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 106: 601–612.
[63]  ávila V, Amador C, García-Dorado A (2010) The purge of genetic load through restricted panmixia in a Drosophila experiment. J Evol Biol 23: 1937–1946.


comments powered by Disqus