Contemporary sexual selection does not explain variation in male display traits among populations.
Divergence
mate choice
reproductive isolation
sexual selection
speciation
Journal
Evolution; international journal of organic evolution
ISSN: 1558-5646
Titre abrégé: Evolution
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0373224
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
09 2019
09 2019
Historique:
received:
15
02
2019
revised:
12
07
2019
accepted:
17
07
2019
pubmed:
26
7
2019
medline:
19
8
2020
entrez:
26
7
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Sexual selection is widely hypothesized to facilitate the evolution of reproductive isolation through divergence in sexual traits and sexual trait preferences among populations. However, direct evidence of divergent sexual selection causing intraspecific trait divergence remains limited. Using the wolf spider Schizocosa crassipes, we characterized patterns of female mate choice within and among geographic locations and related those patterns to geographic variation in male display traits to test whether divergent sexual selection caused by mate choice explains intraspecific trait variation. We found evidence of phenotypic selection on male behavior arising from female mate choice, but no evidence that selection varied among locations. Only those suites of morphological and behavioral traits that did not influence mate choice varied geographically. These results are inconsistent with ongoing divergent sexual selection underlying the observed intraspecific divergence in male display traits. These findings align with theory on the potentially restrictive conditions under which divergent sexual selection may persist, and suggest that long-term studies capable of detecting periodic or transient divergent sexual selection will be critical to rigorously assess the relative importance of divergent sexual selection in intraspecific trait divergence.
Banques de données
Dryad
['10.5061/dryad.9tv0342']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1927-1940Informations de copyright
© 2019 The Author(s). Evolution © 2019 The Society for the Study of Evolution.
Références
Anderson, D. R. 2008. Model based inference in the life sciences: a primer on evidence. Springer Science and Business Media, New York, NY.
Anderson, D. R., and K. P. Burnham. 2002. Avoiding pitfalls when using information-theoretic methods. J. Wildl. Manage. 66:912-918.
Andersson, M. B. 1994. Sexual selection. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, NJ.
Arnegard, M. E., and A. S. Kondrashov. 2004. Sympatric speciation by sexual selection alone is unlikely. Evolution 58:222-237.
Barraclough, T. G., P. H. Harvey, and S. Nee. 1995. Sexual selection and taxonomic diversity in passerine birds. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 259:211-215.
Bolnick, D. I., and B. M. Fitzpatrick. 2007. Sympatric speciation: models and empirical evidence. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 38:459-487.
Boul, K. E., W. C. Funk, C. R. Darst, D. C. Cannatella, and M. J. Ryan. 2006. Sexual selection drives speciation in an Amazonian frog. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B. 274:399-406.
Brooks, R., and J. A. Endler. 2001. Female guppies agree to differ: phenotypic and genetic variation in mate-choice behavior and the consequences for sexual selection. Evolution 55:1644-1655.
Byers, J., E. A. Hebets, and J. Podos. 2010. Female mate choice based upon male motor performance. Anim. Behav. 79:771-778.
Chaine, A. S., and B. E. Lyon. 2008. Adaptive plasticity in female mate choice dampens sexual selection on male ornaments in the lark bunting. Science 319:459-462.
Collins, S. A., C. Hubbard, and A. M. Houtman. 1994. Female mate choice in the zebra finch-the effect of male beak colour and male song. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 35:21-25.
Coyne, J. A., and H. A. Orr. 2004. Speciation. Sinauer, Sunderland, MA.
Delaney, K. J., J. A. Roberts, and G. W. Uetz. 2007. Male signaling behavior and sexual selection in a wolf spider (Araneae: Lycosidae): a test for dual functions. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 62:67-75.
Demary, K., C. I. Michaelidis, and S. M. Lewis. 2006. Firefly courtship: behavioral and morphological predictors of male mating success in Photinus greeni. Ethology 112:485-492.
Elias, D. O., A. C. Mason, and E. A. Hebets. 2010. A signal-substrate match in the substrate-borne component of a multimodal courtship display. Curr. Zool. 56:370-378.
Endler, J. A. 1992. Signals, signal conditions, and the direction of evolution. Amer. Nat. 139:S125-S153.
Endler, J. A., and A. E. Houde. 1995. Geographic variation in female preferences for male traits in Poecilia reticulata. Evolution 49:456-468.
Firth, D. 1993. Bias reduction of maximum likelihood estimates. Biometrika 80:27-38.
Fowler-Finn, K. D. 2009 Exploring the maintenance of and selection on two distinct male morphs in a Schizocosa wolf spider. Univ. of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE.
Friard, O., and M. Gamba. 2016. BORIS: a free, versatile open-source event-logging software for video/audio coding and live observations. Methods Ecol. Evol. 7:1325-1330.
Galeotti, P., R. Sacchi, D. P. Rosa, and M. Fasola. 2005. Female preference for fast-rate, high-pitched calls in Hermann's tortoises Testudo hermanni. Behav. Ecol. 16:301-308.
Gibson, J. S., and G. W. Uetz. 2008. Seismic communication and mate choice in wolf spiders: components of male seismic signals and mating success. Anim. Behav. 75:1253-1262.
Gleason, J. M., and M. G. Ritchie. 1998. Evolution of courtship song and reproductive isolation in the Drosophila willistoni species complex: do sexual signals diverge the most quickly? Evolution 52:1493-1500.
Grace, J. L., and K. L. Shaw. 2012. Incipient sexual isolation in Laupala cerasina: females discriminate population-level divergence in acoustic characters. Curr. Zool. 58:416-425.
Gray, D. A., and W. H. Cade. 2000. Sexual selection and speciation in field crickets. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 97:14449-14454.
Guilford, T., and M. S. Dawkins. 1991. Receiver psychology and the evolution of animal signals. Anim. Behav. 42:1-14.
Hebets, E. A., and G. W. Uetz. 1999. Female responses to isolated signals from multimodal male courtship displays in the wolf spider genus Schizocosa (Araneae: Lycosidae). Anim. Behav. 57:865-872.
Hebets, E. A., D. O. Elias, A. C. Mason, G. L. Miller, and G. E. Stratton. 2008. Substrate-dependent signalling success in the wolf spider Schizocosa retrorsa. Anim. Behav. 75:605-615.
Hebets, E. A., J. A. Stafstrom, R. L. Rodriguez, and D. J. Wilgers. 2011. Enigmatic ornamentation eases male reliance on courtship performance for mating success. Anim. Behav. 81:963-972.
Hebets, E. A., C. J. Vink, L. Sullivan-Beckers, and M. F. Rosenthal. 2013. The dominance of seismic signaling and selection for signal complexity in Schizocosa multimodal courtship displays. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 67:1483-1498.
Higashi, M., G. Takimoto, and N. Yamamura. 1999. Sympatric speciation by sexual selection. Nature 402:523-526.
Horn, J. L. 1965. A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika 30:179-185.
Huang, F. 2015. hornpa: Horn's (1965) test to determine the number of components/factors. R package version 1.0. Available at: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=hornpa
Jann, P., W. U. Blanckenhorn, and P. I. Ward. 2000. Temporal and microspatial variation in the intensities of natural and sexual selection in the yellow dung fly Scathophaga stercoraria. J. Evol. Biol. 13:927-938.
Janzen, F. J., and H. S. Stern. 1998. Logistic regression for empirical studies of multivariate selection. Evolution 52:1564-1571.
Kaiser, H. F. 1958. The varimax criterion for analytic rotation in factor analysis. Psychometrika 23:187-200.
Kasumovic, M. M., M. J. Bruce, M. C. Andrade, and M. E. Herberstein. 2008. Spatial and temporal demographic variation drives within-season fluctuations in sexual selection. Evolution 62:2316-2325.
Kirkpatrick, M., and S. L. Nuismer. 2004. Sexual selection can constrain sympatric speciation. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B. 271:687-693.
Kosmidis, I. 2017. brglm: bias reduction in binary-response generalized linear models. R package version 0.6.1. Available at: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~ucakiko/software.html.
Kotiaho, J., R. V. Alatalo, J. Mappes, and S. Parri. 1996. Sexual selection in a wolf spider: male drumming activity, body size, and viability. Evolution 50:1977-1981.
Kraaijeveld, K., F. J. Kraaijeveld-Smit, and M. E. Maan. 2011. Sexual selection and speciation: the comparative evidence revisited. Biol. Rev. 86:367-377.
Lande, R. 1981. Models of speciation by sexual selection on polygenic traits. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 78:3721-3725.
Lande, R., and S. J. Arnold. 1983. The measurement of selection on correlated characters. Evolution 37:1210-1226.
Madsen, T., and R. Shine. 1993. Temporal variability in sexual selection acting on reproductive tactics and body size in male snakes. Am. Nat. 141:167-171.
Masta, S. E., and W. P. Maddison. 2002. Sexual selection driving diversification in jumping spiders. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99:4442-4447.
McClintock, W. J., and G. W. Uetz. 1996. Female choice and pre-existing bias: visual cues during courtship in two Schizocosa wolf spiders (Araneae: Lycosidae). Anim. Behav. 52:167-181.
Mendelson, T. C. 2003. Sexual isolation evolves faster than hybrid inviability in a diverse and sexually dimorphic genus of fish (Percidae: Etheostoma). Evolution 57:317-327.
Miller, G. L., G. E. Stratton, P. R. Miller, and E. A. Hebets. 1998. Geographical variation in male courtship behaviour and sexual isolation in wolf spiders of the genus Schizocosa. Anim. Behav. 56:937-951.
Mitra, S., H. Landel, and S. Pruett-Jones. 1996. Species richness covaries with mating system in birds. Auk 113:544-551.
Møller, A. P., and J. J. Cuervo. 1998. Speciation and feather ornamentation in birds. Evolution 52:859-869.
O'Connor, B. P. 2000. SPSS and SAS programs for determining the number of components using parallel analysis and Velicer's MAP test. Behav. Res. Meth. Instrum. Comp. 32:396-402.
Panhuis, T. M., R. Butlin, M. Zuk, and T. Tregenza. 2001. Sexual selection and speciation. Trends Ecol. Evol. 16:364-371.
Persons, M. H., and G. W. Uetz. 2005. Sexual cannibalism and mate choice decisions in wolf spiders: influence of male size and secondary sexual characters. Anim. Behav. 69:83-94.
Reed, D. H., V. H. Teoh, G. E. Stratton and R. A. Hataway. 2011. Levels of gene flow among populations of a wolf spider in a recently fragmented habitat: current versus historical rates. Conserv. Genet. 12:331-335.
Revelle, W. 2017. psych: procedures for psychological, psychometric, and personality research. R package version 1.7.5. Available at: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=psych.
Ritchie, M. G. 2007. Sexual selection and speciation. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 38:79-102.
Roberts, J. A., and G. W. Uetz. 2005. Information content of female chemical signals in the wolf spider, Schizocosa ocreata: male discrimination of reproductive state and receptivity. Anim. Behav. 70:217-223.
Safran, R. J., E. S. Scordato, L. B. Symes, R. L. Rodríguez, and T. C. Mendelson. 2013. Contributions of natural and sexual selection to the evolution of premating reproductive isolation: a research agenda. Trends Ecol. Evol. 28:643-650.
Scheffer, S. J., G. W. Uetz, and G. E. Stratton. 1996. Sexual selection, male morphology, and the efficacy of courtship signalling in two wolf spiders (Araneae: Lycosidae). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 38:17-23.
Schluter, D. 2001. Ecology and the origin of species. Trends Ecol. Evol. 16:372-380.
Schluter, D., and T. Price. 1993. Honesty, perception and population divergence in sexually selected traits. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 253:117-122.
Seddon, N., R. M. Merrill, and J. A. Tobias. 2008. Sexually selected traits predict patterns of species richness in a diverse clade of suboscine birds. Am. Nat. 171:620-631.
Selz, O. M., R. Thommen, M. E. R. Pierotti, J. M. Anaya-Rojas, and O. Seehausen. 2016. Differences in male coloration are predicted by divergent sexual selection between populations of a cichlid fish. Proc. R. Soc. B. 283:20160172.
Servedio, M. R. and M. A. Noor. 2003. The role of reinforcement in speciation: theory and data. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 34:339-364.
Shamble, P. S., D. J. Wilgers, K. A. Swoboda and E. A. Hebets. 2009. Courtship effort is a better predictor of mating success than ornamentation for male wolf spiders. Behav. Ecol. 20:1242-1251.
Stafstrom, J. A. and E. A. Hebets. 2013. Female mate choice for multimodal courtship and the importance of the signaling background for selection on male ornamentation. Curr. Zool. 59:200-209.
Stratton, G. E. 2005. Evolution of ornamentation and courtship behavior in Schizocosa: insights from a phylogeny based on morphology (Araneae, Lycosidae). J. Arachnol. 33:347-376.
Stratton, G. E. and G. W. Uetz. 1981. Acoustic communication and reproductive isolation in two species of wolf spiders. Science 214:575-577.
Svensson, E. I., F. Eroukhmanoff, and M. Friberg. 2006. Effects of natural and sexual selection on adaptive population divergence and premating isolation in a damselfly. Evolution 60:1242-1253.
Tietjen, W. J. 1977. Dragline-following by male lycosid spiders. Psyche 84:165-178.
Tietjen, W. J. 1979. Is the sex pheromone of Lycosa rabida (Araneae:Lycosidae) deposited on a substratum? J. Arachnol. 6:207-212.
Turelli, M., N. H. Barton, and J. A. Coyne. 2001. Theory and speciation. Trends Ecol. Evol. 16:330-343.
Uetz, G. W. and S. Norton. 2007. Preference for male traits in female wolf spiders varies with the choice of available males, female age and reproductive state. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 61:631-641.
Uetz, G. W., J. A. Roberts, and P. W. Taylor. 2009. Multimodal communication and mate choice in wolf spiders: female response to multimodal versus unimodal signals. Anim. Behav. 78:299-305.
van Doorn, G. S., U. Dieckmann, and F. J. Weissing. 2004. Sympatric speciation by sexual selection: a critical reevaluation. Am. Nat. 163:709-725.
Wagner, W. E. Jr. 1996. Convergent song preferences between female field crickets and acoustically orienting parasitoid flies. Behav. Ecol. 7:279-285.
Wagner, C. E., L. J. Harmon, and O. Seehausen. 2012. Ecological opportunity and sexual selection together predict adaptive radiation. Nature 487:366-369.
Weissing, F. J., P. Edelaar, and G. S. Van Doorn. 2011. Adaptive speciation theory: a conceptual review. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 65:461-480.
West-Eberhard, M. J. 1983. Sexual selection, social competition, and speciation. Q. Rev. Biol. 58:155-183.
Wilkins, M. R., H. Karaardıç, Y. Vortman, T. L. Parchman, T. Albrecht, A. Petrželková, L. Özkan, P. L. Pap, J. K. Hubbard, A. K. Hund, et al. 2016. Phenotypic differentiation is associated with divergent sexual selection among closely related barn swallow populations. J. Evol. Biol. 29:2410-2421.