4.7 Article

Heterozygosity-based assortative mating in blue tits (Cyanistes caeruleus): implications for the evolution of mate choice

期刊

出版社

ROYAL SOC
DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2009.0417

关键词

assortative mating; blue tit; genetic diversity; heterozygosity; relatedness

资金

  1. Organismo Autonomo de Parques Nacionales-Ministerio de Medio Ambiente [69/2003]
  2. Ministerio de Educacion y Ciencia [GCL2007-61395]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The general hypothesis of mate choice based on non-additive genetic traits suggests that individuals would gain important benefits by choosing genetically dissimilar mates (compatible mate hypothesis) and/or more heterozygous mates (heterozygous mate hypothesis). In this study, we test these hypotheses in a socially monogamous bird, the blue tit (Cyanistes caeruleus). We found no evidence for a relatedness-based mating pattern, but heterozygosity was positively correlated between social mates, suggesting that blue tits may base their mating preferences on partner's heterozygosity. We found evidence that the observed heterozygosity-based assortative mating could be maintained by both direct and indirect benefits. Heterozygosity reflected individual quality in both sexes: egg production and quality increased with female heterozygosity while more heterozygous males showed higher feeding rates during the brood-rearing period. Further, estimated offspring heterozygosity correlated with both paternal and maternal heterozygosity, suggesting that mating with heterozygous individuals can increase offspring genetic quality. Finally, plumage crown coloration was associated with male heterozygosity, and this could explain unanimous mate preferences for highly heterozygous and more ornamented individuals. Overall, this study suggests that non-additive genetic traits may play an important role in the evolution of mating preferences and offers empirical support to the resolution of the lek paradox from the perspective of the heterozygous mate hypothesis.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据