4.2 Article

Condition dependence of male and female genital structures in the seed beetle Callosobruchus maculatus (Coleoptera: Bruchidae)

期刊

JOURNAL OF EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY
卷 28, 期 7, 页码 1364-1372

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jeb.12659

关键词

Allometry; Callosobruchus maculatus; condition dependence; diet manipulation; genital evolution; genital spines; genitalia; sexual conflict; sexual selection

资金

  1. Australian Research Council

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Theory predicts that costly secondary sexual traits will evolve heightened condition dependence, and many studies have reported strong condition dependence of signal and weapon traits in a variety of species. However, although genital structures often play key roles in intersexual interactions and appear to be subject to sexual or sexually antagonistic selection, few studies have examined the condition dependence of genital structures, especially in both sexes simultaneously. We investigated the responses of male and female genital structures to manipulation of larval diet quality (new versus once-used mung beans) in the bruchid seed beetle Callosobruchus maculatus. We quantified effects on mean relative size and static allometry of the male aedeagus, aedeagal spines, flap and paramere and the female reproductive tract and bursal spines. None of the male traits showed a significant effect of diet quality. In females, we found that longer bursal spines (relative to body size) were expressed on low-quality diet. Although the function of bursal spines is poorly understood, we suggest that greater bursal spine length in low-condition females may represent a sexually antagonistic adaptation. Overall, we found no evidence that genital traits in C. maculatus are expressed to a greater extent when nutrients are more abundant. This suggests that, even though some genital traits appear to function as secondary sexual traits, genital traits do not exhibit heightened condition dependence in this species. We discuss possible reasons for this finding.

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

4.2
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