PMCCPMCCPMCC

Search tips
Search criteria 

Advanced

 
Logo of procbThe Royal Society PublishingProceedings BAboutBrowse by SubjectAlertsFree Trial
 
Proc Biol Sci. 2001 February 22; 268(1465): 399–405.
PMCID: PMC1088620

Genetic divergence of the seminal signal-receptor system in houseflies: the footprints of sexually antagonistic coevolution?

Abstract

To understand fully the significance of cryptic female choice, we need to focus on each of those postmating processes in females which create variance in fitness among males. Earlier studies have focused almost exclusively on the proportion of a female's eggs fertilized by different males (sperm precedence). Yet, variance in male postmating reproductive success may also arise from differences in ability to stimulate female oviposition and to delay female remating. Here, we present a series of reciprocal mating experiments among genetically differentiated wild-type strains of the housefly Musca domestica. We compared the effects of male and female genotype on oviposition and remating by females. The genotype of each sex affected both female oviposition and remating rates, demonstrating that the signal-receptor system involved has indeed diverged among these strains. Further, there was a significant interaction between the effects of male and female genotype on oviposition rate. We discuss ways in which the pattern of such interactions provides insights into the coevolutionary mechanism involved. Females in our experiments generally exhibited the weakest, rather than the strongest, response to males with which they are coevolved. These results support the hypothesis that coevolution of male seminal signals and female receptors is sexually antagonistic.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (156K).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
  • Adams TS, Nelson DR. Bioassay of crude extracts for the factor that prevents second matings in female musca domestica. Ann Entomol Soc Am. 1968 Jan;61(1):112–116. [PubMed]
  • Aguadé M. Different forces drive the evolution of the Acp26Aa and Acp26Ab accessory gland genes in the Drosophila melanogaster species complex. Genetics. 1998 Nov;150(3):1079–1089. [PubMed]
  • Aguadé M. Positive selection drives the evolution of the Acp29AB accessory gland protein in Drosophila. Genetics. 1999 Jun;152(2):543–551. [PubMed]
  • Arnqvist G, Nilsson T. The evolution of polyandry: multiple mating and female fitness in insects. Anim Behav. 2000 Aug;60(2):145–164. [PubMed]
  • Birkhead TR. Defining and demonstrating postcopulatory female choice--again. Evolution. 2000 Jun;54(3):1057–1060. [PubMed]
  • Chapman T, Liddle LF, Kalb JM, Wolfner MF, Partridge L. Cost of mating in Drosophila melanogaster females is mediated by male accessory gland products. Nature. 1995 Jan 19;373(6511):241–244. [PubMed]
  • Chapman T, Miyatake T, Smith HK, Partridge L. Interactions of mating, egg production and death rates in females of the Mediterranean fruit fly, Ceratitis capitata. Proc Biol Sci. 1998 Oct 7;265(1408):1879–1894. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Chapman T, Neubaum DM, Wolfner MF, Partridge L. The role of male accessory gland protein Acp36DE in sperm competition in Drosophila melanogaster. Proc Biol Sci. 2000 Jun 7;267(1448):1097–1105. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Civetta A, Clark AG. Chromosomal effects on male and female components of sperm precedence in Drosophila. Genet Res. 2000 Apr;75(2):143–151. [PubMed]
  • Civetta A, Singh RS. High divergence of reproductive tract proteins and their association with postzygotic reproductive isolation in Drosophila melanogaster and Drosophila virilis group species. J Mol Evol. 1995 Dec;41(6):1085–1095. [PubMed]
  • Clark AG, Begun DJ. Female genotypes affect sperm displacement in Drosophila. Genetics. 1998 Jul;149(3):1487–1493. [PubMed]
  • Clark AG, Aguadé M, Prout T, Harshman LG, Langley CH. Variation in sperm displacement and its association with accessory gland protein loci in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics. 1995 Jan;139(1):189–201. [PubMed]
  • Clark AG, Begun DJ, Prout T. Female x male interactions in Drosophila sperm competition. Science. 1999 Jan 8;283(5399):217–220. [PubMed]
  • Cook PA, Harvey IF, Parker GA. Predicting variation in sperm precedence. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1997 Jul 29;352(1355):771–780. [PMC free article]
  • Fukui HH, Gromko MH. Genetic basis for remating in Drosophila melanogaster. VI. Recombination analysis. Behav Genet. 1991 Mar;21(2):199–209. [PubMed]
  • Gromko MH, Newport ME. Genetic basis for remating in Drosophila melanogaster. II. Response to selection based on the behavior of one sex. Behav Genet. 1988 Sep;18(5):621–632. [PubMed]
  • Holland B, Rice WR. Experimental removal of sexual selection reverses intersexual antagonistic coevolution and removes a reproductive load. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999 Apr 27;96(9):5083–5088. [PubMed]
  • Hughes KA. Quantitative genetics of sperm precedence in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics. 1997 Jan;145(1):139–151. [PubMed]
  • KEIDING J, AREVAD K. PROCEDURE AND EQUIPMENT FOR REARING A LARGE NUMBER OF HOUSEFLY STRAINS. Bull World Health Organ. 1964;31:527–528. [PubMed]
  • Keller L. Evolutionary biology. All's fair when love is war. Nature. 1995 Jan 19;373(6511):190–191. [PubMed]
  • Leopold RA, Terranova AC, Swilley EM. Mating refusal in Musca domestica: effects of repeated mating and decerebration upon frequency and duration of copulation. J Exp Zool. 1971 Mar;176(3):353–359. [PubMed]
  • Parker GA, Partridge L. Sexual conflict and speciation. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1998 Feb 28;353(1366):261–274. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Pitnick S, Brown WD. Criteria for demonstrating female sperm choice. Evolution. 2000 Jun;54(3):1052–1056. [PubMed]
  • Pizzari T, Birkhead TR. Female feral fowl eject sperm of subdominant males. Nature. 2000 Jun 15;405(6788):787–789. [PubMed]
  • Rice WR. Sexually antagonistic male adaptation triggered by experimental arrest of female evolution. Nature. 1996 May 16;381(6579):232–234. [PubMed]
  • Riemann JG, Thorson BJ. Effect of male accessory material on oviposition and mating by female house flies. Ann Entomol Soc Am. 1969 Jul;62(4):828–834. [PubMed]
  • Riemann JG, Moen DJ, Thorson BJ. Female monogamy and its control in houselfies. J Insect Physiol. 1967 Jan;13(3):407–418. [PubMed]
  • Service PM, Vossbrink RE. Genetic variation in "first" male effects on egg laying and remating by female Drosophila melanogaster. Behav Genet. 1996 Jan;26(1):39–48. [PubMed]
  • Sgrò CM, Chapman T, Partridge L. Sex-specific selection on time to remate in Drosophila melanogaster. Anim Behav. 1998 Nov;56(5):1267–1278. [PubMed]
  • Terranova AC, Leopold RA, Degrugillier ME, Johnson JR. Electrophoresis of the male accessory secretion and its fate in the mated female. J Insect Physiol. 1972 Aug;18(8):1573–1591. [PubMed]
  • Thomas S, Singh RS. A comprehensive study of genic variation in natural populations of Drosophila melanogaster. VII. Varying rates of genic divergence as revealed by two-dimensional electrophoresis. Mol Biol Evol. 1992 May;9(3):507–525. [PubMed]
  • Tsaur SC, Ting CT, Wu CI. Positive selection driving the evolution of a gene of male reproduction, Acp26Aa, of Drosophila: II. Divergence versus polymorphism. Mol Biol Evol. 1998 Aug;15(8):1040–1046. [PubMed]
  • Van Vianen A, Bijlsma R. The adult component of selection in Drosophila melanogaster: some aspects of early-remating activity of females. Heredity (Edinb) 1993 Sep;71(Pt 3):269–276. [PubMed]
  • Wilson N, Tubman SC, Eady PE, Robertson GW. Female genotype affects male success in sperm competition. Proc Biol Sci. 1997 Oct 22;264(1387):1491–1495. [PMC free article]
  • Wolfner MF, Harada HA, Bertram MJ, Stelick TJ, Kraus KW, Kalb JM, Lung YO, Neubaum DM, Park M, Tram U. New genes for male accessory gland proteins in Drosophila melanogaster. Insect Biochem Mol Biol. 1997 Oct;27(10):825–834. [PubMed]

Articles from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences are provided here courtesy of The Royal Society