4.5 Article

Genetic differentiation by sexual conflict

Journal

EVOLUTION
Volume 61, Issue 3, Pages 516-529

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2007.00059.x

Keywords

diploid; genetic divergence; mathematical models; mating rate; multilocus; polymorphism; sympatric speciation

Funding

  1. NIGMS NIH HHS [GM56693] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Sexual conflict has been suggested as a general cause of genetic diversification in reproductive characters, and as a possible cause of speciation. We use individual-based simulations to study the dynamics of sexual conflict in an isolated diploid population with no spatial structure. To explore the effects of genetic details, we consider two different types of interlocus interaction between female and male traits, and three different types of intra-locus interaction. In the simulations, sexual conflict resulted in at least the following five regimes: (1) continuous coevolutionary chase, (2) evolution toward an equilibrium, (3) cyclic coevolution, (4) extensive genetic differentiation in female traits/genes only, and (5) extensive genetic differentiation in both male and female traits/genes. Genetic differentiation was hardly observed when the traits involved in reproduction were determined additively and interacted in a trait-by-trait way. When the traits interacted in a cornponent-by-component way, genetic differentiation was frequently observed under relatively broad conditions. The likelihood of genetic differentiation largely depended on the number of loci and the type of within-locus dominance. With multiple loci per trait, genetic differentiation was often observed but sympatric speciation was typically hindered by recombination. Sympatric speciation was possible but only under restrictive conditions. Our simulations also highlight the importance of stochastic effects in the dynamics of sexual conflict.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available