4.6 Article Proceedings Paper

Natural variation in male-induced 'cost-of-mating' and allele-specific association with male reproductive genes in Drosophila melanogaster

出版社

ROYAL SOC
DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2005.1791

关键词

cost of reproduction; sexual selection; sexual conflict; accessory gland proteins; sexually antagonistic coevolution

类别

资金

  1. NIGMS NIH HHS [F32 GM070300, 1 F32 GM70300-01] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

One of the most sharply defined sexual conflicts arises when the act of mating is accompanied by an inflated risk of death. Several reports have documented an increased death rate of female Drosophila as a result of recurrent mating. Transgenic and mutation experiments have further identified components of seminal fluid that are at least in part responsible for this toxicity. Variation among males in their tendency for matings to be toxic to their partners has also been documented, but here for the first time we identify polymorphism within particular genes conferring differential postmating female mortality. Such polymorphism is important, as it raises the challenge of whether sexual conflict models can provide means for maintenance of polymorphism. Using a set of second chromosome extraction lines, we scored differences in post-mating female fecundity and longevity subsequent to mating, and identified significant among-line differences. Seventy polymorphisms in ten male reproductive genes were scored and permutation tests were used to identify significant associations between genotype and phenotype. One polymorphism upstream of PEBII and an amino acid substitution in CG17331 were both associated with male-induced female mortality. The same allele of CG17331 that is toxic to females also induces greater reftactoriness to remating in the females, providing an example of an allele-specific sexual conflict. Postcopulatory sexual selection could lead to sexual conflict by favouring males that prevent their mates from mating, even when there is a viability cost to those females.

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

4.6
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