%0 Journal Article
%T Evolution of sexual dimorphism of wing shape in the Drosophila melanogaster subgroup
%A Nelly A Gidaszewski
%A Michel Baylac
%A Christian Klingenberg
%J BMC Evolutionary Biology
%D 2009
%I BioMed Central
%R 10.1186/1471-2148-9-110
%X We investigated sexual dimorphism in wing shape in the nine species of the Drosophila melanogaster subgroup. We used geometric morphometrics to characterise wing shape and found significant SShD in all nine species. The amount of shape difference and the diversity of the shape changes evolved across the group. However, mapping the divergence of SShD onto the phylogeny of the Drosophila melanogaster subgroup indicated that there is little phylogenetic signal. Finally, allometry accounted for a substantial part of SShD, but did not explain the bulk of evolutionary divergence in SShD because allometry itself was found to be evolutionarily plastic.SShD in the Drosophila wing can evolve rapidly and therefore shows only weak phylogenetic structure. The variable contribution of allometric and non-allometric components to the evolutionary divergence of SShD and the evolutionary plasticity of allometry suggest that SShD and allometry are influenced by a complex interaction of processes.Sexual dimorphism is one of the most striking and widespread sources of phenotypic variation in animals and plants and has therefore attracted considerable interest in evolutionary biology. The evolution of sex dimorphism has been extensively studied, but most studies have concerned dimorphism of size [1-4]. In contrast, sexual shape dimorphism (SShD) has been much less investigated.Of those studies that considered SShD, most have discussed it as a diagnostic-trait for diverse purposes, such as sex identification or the analysis of ontogeny [5-14]. Only relatively few investigations have specifically considered the evolution of SShD, covering a wide range of study systems including the skull in primates [15-18], body proportions of lizards [19,20], newts [21] or flies [22], the head shape of Chironomus larvae [23] and Lycium flowers [24]. With few exceptions, these studies used only small numbers of species and no explicit phylogenetic framework for analyzing evolutionary change.A factor that
%U http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2148/9/110