全部 标题 作者
关键词 摘要

OALib Journal期刊
ISSN: 2333-9721
费用:99美元

查看量下载量

相关文章

更多...
PLOS ONE  2012 

Moderate Multiple Parentage and Low Genetic Variation Reduces the Potential for Genetic Incompatibility Avoidance Despite High Risk of Inbreeding

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0029636

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

Background Polyandry is widespread throughout the animal kingdom. In the absence of direct benefits of mating with different males, the underlying basis for polyandry is enigmatic because it can carry considerable costs such as elevated exposure to sexual diseases, physical injury or other direct fitness costs. Such costs may be balanced by indirect genetic benefits to the offspring of polyandrous females. We investigated polyandry and patterns of parentage in the spider Stegodyphus lineatus. This species experiences relatively high levels of inbreeding as a result of its spatial population structure, philopatry and limited male mating dispersal. Polyandry may provide an opportunity for post mating inbreeding avoidance that reduces the risk of genetic incompatibilities arising from incestuous matings. However, multiple mating carries direct fitness costs to females suggesting that genetic benefits must be substantial to counter direct costs. Methodology/Principal Findings Genetic parentage analyses in two populations from Israel and a Greek island, showed mixed-brood parentage in approximately 50% of the broods. The number of fathers ranged from 1–2 indicating low levels of multiple parentage and there was no evidence for paternity bias in mixed-broods from both populations. Microsatellite loci variation suggested limited genetic variation within populations, especially in the Greek island population. Relatedness estimates among females in the maternal generation and potentially interacting individuals were substantial indicating full-sib and half-sib relationships. Conclusions/Significance Three lines of evidence indicate limited potential to obtain substantial genetic benefits in the form of reduced inbreeding. The relatively low frequency of multiple parentage together with low genetic variation among potential mates and the elevated risk of mating among related individuals as corroborated by our genetic data suggest that there are limited actual outbreeding opportunities for polyandrous females. Polyandry in S. lineatus is thus unlikely to be maintained through adaptive female choice.

References

[1]  Daly M (1978) The cost of mating. The American Naturalist 112: 771–774.
[2]  Knell RJ, Webberley KM (2004) Sexually transmitted disease of insects: distribution, evolution, ecology and host behaviour. Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 79: 557–581.
[3]  Arnqvist G, Rowe L (2005) Sexual Conflict. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
[4]  Birkhead TR, M?ller AP (1998) Sperm Competition and Sexual Selection. London: Academic Press.
[5]  Arnqvist G, Nilsson T (2000) The evolution of polyandry: Multiple mating and female fitness in insects. Animal Behaviour 60: 145–164.
[6]  Thornhill R, Alcock J (1983) The Evolution of Insect Mating Systems. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
[7]  Yasui Y (1997) A “good sperm” model can explain the evolution of costly multiple mating by females. The American Naturalist 149: 573–584.
[8]  Zeh JA, Zeh DW (1996) The evolution of polyandry I: intragenomic conflict and genetic incompatibility. Proceedings of the Royal Society London B 263: 1711–1717.
[9]  Puurtinen M, Ketola T, Kotiaho JS (2005) Genetic compatibility and sexual selection. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 20: 157–158.
[10]  Bilde T, Friberg U, Maklakov AA, Fry JD, Arnqvist G (2008) The genetic architecture of fitness in a seed beetle: assessing the potential for indirect genetic benefits of female choice. BMC Evolutionary Biology 8: 295.
[11]  García-González F, Simmons LW (2005) The evolution of polyandry: intrinsic sire effects contribute to embryo viability. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 18: 1097–1103.
[12]  Newcomer SD, Zeh JA, Zeh DW (1999) Genetic benefits enhance the reproductive success of polyandrous females. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 96: 10236–10241.
[13]  Foerster K, Delhey K, Johnsenm A, Lifjeld JT, Kempenaers B (2003) Females increase offspring heterozygosity and fitness through extra-pair matings. Nature 425: 714–717.
[14]  Jennions MD, Petrie M (2000) Why do females mate multiply? A review of the genetic benefits. Biological Reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 75: 21–64.
[15]  Simmons LW (2005) The evolution of polyandry: sperm competition, sperm selection and offspring viability. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 36: 125–146.
[16]  Tregenza T, Wedell N (2000) Genetic compatibility, mate choice and patterns of parentage. Molecular Ecology 9: 1013–1027.
[17]  Olsson M, Shine R, Madsen T, Gullberg A, Tegelstr?m H (1996) Sperm selection by females. Nature 383: 585.
[18]  Tregenza T, Wedell N (2002) Polyandrous females avoid costs of inbreeding. Nature 415: 71–73.
[19]  Bretman A, Newcombe D, Tregenza T (2009) Promiscuous females avoid inbreeding by controlling sperm storage. Molecular Ecology 18: 3340–3345.
[20]  Bretman A, Wedell N, Tregenza T (2004) Molecular evidence of post-copulatory inbreeding avoidance in the field cricket Gryllus bimaculatus. Proceedings of the Royal Society London B 271: 159–164.
[21]  Simmons LW, Beveridge M, Wedell N, Tregenza T (2006) Postcopulatory inbreeding avoidance by female crickets only revealed by molecular markers. Molecular Ecology 15: 3817–3824.
[22]  Holland B, Rice WR (1999) Experimental removal of sexual selection reverses inter-sexual antagonistic coevolution and removes a reproductive load. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 96: 5083–5088.
[23]  Rice WR (1996) Sexually antagonistic male adaptation triggered by experimental arrest of female evolution. Nature 381: 232–234.
[24]  Zeh JA, Zeh DW (2003) Toward a new sexual selection paradigm: Polyandry, Conflict and Incompatibility. Ethology 109: 929–950.
[25]  Bilde T, Lubin Y, Smith D, Schneider JM, Maklakov AA (2005) The transition to social inbred mating systems in spiders: role of inbreeding tolerance in a subsocial predecessor. Evolution 59: 160–174.
[26]  Johannesen J, Lubin Y (1999) Group founding and breeding structure in the subsocial spider Stegodyphus lineatus (Eresidae). Heredity 82: 677–686.
[27]  Schneider JM, Lubin Y (1997) Infanticide by males in a spider with suicidal maternal care, Stegodyphus lineatus (Eresidae). Animal Behaviour 54: 305–312.
[28]  Maklakov AA, Bilde T, Lubin Y (2005) Sexual conflict in the wild: elevated mating rate reduces female lifetime reproductive success. The American Naturalist 165: S38–S45.
[29]  Schneider J (1997) Timing of maturation and the mating system of the spider, Stegodyphus lineatus (Eresidae): how important is body size? . Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 60: 517–525.
[30]  Schneider JM, Lubin Y (1996) Infanticidal male eresid spiders. Nature 381: 655–656.
[31]  Maklakov AA, Lubin Y (2004) Sexual conflict over mating in a spider: increased fecundity does not compensate for the costs of polyandry. Evolution 58: 1135–1140.
[32]  Erez T, Schneider JM, Lubin Y (2005) Is male cohabitation costly for females of the spider Stegodyphus lineatus (Eresidae)? Ethology 111: 693–704.
[33]  Kirkpatrick M, Barton NH (1997) The strength of indirect selection on female mating preferences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 94: 1282–1286.
[34]  Arnqvist G, Kirkpatrick M (2005) The evolution of infidelity in social monogamous passerines: the strength of direct and indirect selection on extrapair copulation in females. The American Naturalist 165: S26–S37.
[35]  Wade MJ, Shuster SM, Demuth JP (2003) Sexual selection favors female-biased sex ratios: the balance between the opposing forces of sex-ratio selection and sexual selection. The American Naturalist 162: 403–414.
[36]  Fromhage L, Kokko H, Reid JM (2009) Evolution of mate choice for genome-wide heterozygosity. Evolution 63: 684–694.
[37]  Bilde T, Tuni C, Cariani A, Santini A, Tabarroni C, et al. (2009) Characterisation of microsatellite loci in the subsocial spider Stegodyphus lineatus, (Araneae: Eresidae). Molecular Ecology Resources 9: 128–130.
[38]  Johannesen J, Lubin Y (2001) Evidence for kin-structured group founding and limited juvenile dispersal in the sub-social spider Stegodyphus lineatus (Araneae, Eresidae). The Journal of arachnology 29: 413–422.
[39]  Villesen P, Fredsted T (2006) Fast and non-invasive PCR sexing of primates: apes, Old World monkeys, New World monkeys and Strepsirrhines. BMC Ecology 6: 8.
[40]  Oosterhout CV, Hutchinson WF, Wills DPM, Shipley P (2004) MICRO-CHECKER: software for identifying and correcting genotyping errors in microsatellite data. molecular Ecology Notes 4: 535–538.
[41]  Sefc KM, Koblmuller S (2009) Assessing Parent Numbers from Offspring Genotypes: The Importance of Marker Polymorphism. Journal of Heredity 100: 197–205.
[42]  Neff BD, Pitcher TE (2002) Assessing the statistical power of genetic analyses to detect multiple mating in fishes. Journal of Fish Biology 61: 739–750.
[43]  Jones AG (2005) GERUD2.0: a computer program for the reconstruction of parental genotypes from half-sib progeny arrays with known or unknown parents. Molecular Ecology Notes 5: 708–711.
[44]  Emery AM, Wilson IJ, Craig S, Boyle PR, Noble LR (2001) Assignment of paternity groups without access to parental genotypes: multiple mating and development plasticity in squid. Molecular Ecology 10: 1265–1278.
[45]  Bretman A, Tregenza T (2005) Measuring polyandry in wild populations: a case study using promiscuous crickets. Molecular Ecology 14: 2169–2179.
[46]  Simmons LW, Beveridge M, Kennington WJ (2007) Polyandry in the wild: temporal changes in female mating frequency and sperm competition intensity in natural populations of the tettigoniid Requena verticalis. Molecular Ecology 16:
[47]  Schneider J, Lubin Y (1997) Does high mortality explain semelparity in the spider Stegodyphus lineatus (Eresidae)? Oikos 79: 92–100.
[48]  Raymond M, Roussett F (1995) GENEPOP (version 1.2): population genetic software for exact tests and ecumenicism. Journal of Heredity 86: 248.
[49]  Goudet J (1995) FSTAT (Version 1.2): A computer program to calculate F-statistics. J Hered 86: 485–486.
[50]  Kalinowski ST, Wagner AA, Taper M (2006) ML-RELATE: a computer program for maximum likelihood estimation of relatedness and relationship. Molecular Ecology Notes 6: 576–579.
[51]  Keller LF, Waller DM (2002) Inbreeding effects in wild populations. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 17: 230–241.
[52]  Reed DH, Frankham R (2003) Correlation between population fitness and genetic diversity. Conservation Biology 17: 230–237.
[53]  Charlesworth D, Charlesworth B (1987) Inbreeding depression and its evolutionary consequences. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 18: 237–268.
[54]  Pusey A, Wolf M (1996) Inbreeding avoidance in animals. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 11: 201–206.
[55]  Houle D, Kondrashov AS (2002) Coevolution of costly mate choice and condition-dependent display of good genes. Proceedings of the Royal Society London B 269: 97–104.
[56]  Petrie M, Doums C, M?ller AP (1998) The degree of extra-pair paternity increases with genetic variability. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 95: 9390–9395.
[57]  M?ller AP, Alatalo RV (1999) Good-genes effects in sexual selection. Proceedings of the Royal Society London B 266: 85–91.
[58]  Ramirez MG, Wight EC, Chirikian VA, Escobedo ES, Quezada LK, et al. (2009) Evidence for multiple paternity in broods of the green lynx spider Peucetia viridans (Araneae: Oxyopidae). Journal of Arachnology 37: 375–378.
[59]  Griffith SC, Owens IPF, Thuman KA (2002) Extra pair paternity in birds: a review of interspecific variation and adaptive function. Molecular Ecology 11:
[60]  Jensen MP, Abreu-Grobois FA, Frydenberg J, Loeschcke V (2006) Microsatellites provide insight into contrasting mating patterns in arribada vs. non arribada olive ridley sea turtle rookeries. Molecular Ecology 15: 2567–2575.
[61]  Simmons LW, Beveridge M, Evans JP (2008) Molecular evidence for multiple paternity in a feral population of green swordtails. Journal of Heredity 99: 610–615.

Full-Text

Contact Us

service@oalib.com

QQ:3279437679

WhatsApp +8615387084133