黑腹果蝇雄性有限选择引起的室内性冲突的混合证据。

IF 2.5 2区 生物学 Q2 EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY
Harshavardhan Thyagarajan, Imran Sayyed, Mindy G Baroody, Joshua A Kowal, Troy Day, Adam K Chippindale
{"title":"黑腹果蝇雄性有限选择引起的室内性冲突的混合证据。","authors":"Harshavardhan Thyagarajan, Imran Sayyed, Mindy G Baroody, Joshua A Kowal, Troy Day, Adam K Chippindale","doi":"10.1093/jhered/esaf072","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Sexual conflict over shared traits-intralocus sexual conflict (IaSC)-may be common and consequential, but experimental tests of its relative magnitude are challenging and limited in number. We use a sex-limited selection experiment, designed to subject haplotypes of Drosophila melanogaster to selection for male fitness without opposing selection acting on female fitness. Importantly, we use three novel base populations to compare results with those from the LHM population, the sole population investigated using this technique. In contrast with previous studies, we find that male fitness of haplotypes subject to male-limited selection (ML populations) are not consistently better than their matched (MC) controls when tested in the 'wildtype' state. Males from ML lines did not outperform controls in competitive fitness assays, mate choice trials, fecundity induction or sperm offense tests. As predicted, genetic variation for male fitness was reduced, with low fitness haplotypes apparently removed by selection, but this was only surveyed in one replicate population pair and included a potential artefact in the protocol. Female fitness was markedly reduced by carriage of ML haplotypes, as predicted by sexual antagonism. Hence, our results are only partially consistent with the IaSC hypothesis, raising questions about the relative contribution of sexual conflict to the standing genetic variation in these populations and the potential role of artefacts in the protocol that may have obscured our ability to detect IaSC.</p>","PeriodicalId":54811,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Heredity","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mixed evidence for intralocus sexual conflict from male-limited selection in Drosophila melanogaster.\",\"authors\":\"Harshavardhan Thyagarajan, Imran Sayyed, Mindy G Baroody, Joshua A Kowal, Troy Day, Adam K Chippindale\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/jhered/esaf072\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Sexual conflict over shared traits-intralocus sexual conflict (IaSC)-may be common and consequential, but experimental tests of its relative magnitude are challenging and limited in number. We use a sex-limited selection experiment, designed to subject haplotypes of Drosophila melanogaster to selection for male fitness without opposing selection acting on female fitness. Importantly, we use three novel base populations to compare results with those from the LHM population, the sole population investigated using this technique. In contrast with previous studies, we find that male fitness of haplotypes subject to male-limited selection (ML populations) are not consistently better than their matched (MC) controls when tested in the 'wildtype' state. Males from ML lines did not outperform controls in competitive fitness assays, mate choice trials, fecundity induction or sperm offense tests. As predicted, genetic variation for male fitness was reduced, with low fitness haplotypes apparently removed by selection, but this was only surveyed in one replicate population pair and included a potential artefact in the protocol. Female fitness was markedly reduced by carriage of ML haplotypes, as predicted by sexual antagonism. Hence, our results are only partially consistent with the IaSC hypothesis, raising questions about the relative contribution of sexual conflict to the standing genetic variation in these populations and the potential role of artefacts in the protocol that may have obscured our ability to detect IaSC.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54811,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Heredity\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Heredity\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/jhered/esaf072\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Heredity","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jhered/esaf072","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

因共同特征而产生的性冲突,即局域性冲突(IaSC),可能是常见的,也会产生相应的后果,但对其相对程度的实验测试是具有挑战性的,而且数量有限。我们使用了一个性别限制的选择实验,设计使黑腹果蝇的单倍型选择雄性适合度,而不反对选择作用于雌性适合度。重要的是,我们使用了三个新的基础种群来比较LHM种群的结果,LHM种群是使用该技术调查的唯一种群。与以往的研究相比,我们发现在“野生型”状态下,受雄性有限选择(ML种群)影响的单倍型的雄性适合度并不总是优于其匹配(MC)对照。来自ML系的雄性在竞争适应度分析、配偶选择试验、生育诱导或精子进攻测试中没有优于对照。正如预测的那样,男性适应性的遗传变异减少了,低适应性的单倍型显然是通过选择而被移除的,但这只在一个重复种群对中进行了调查,并且在方案中包含了一个潜在的人工产物。正如性别拮抗所预测的那样,携带ML单倍型显著降低了雌性的适合度。因此,我们的结果仅与IaSC假设部分一致,这就提出了关于性冲突对这些人群中存在的遗传变异的相对贡献的问题,以及可能掩盖我们检测IaSC能力的协议中的人工制品的潜在作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Mixed evidence for intralocus sexual conflict from male-limited selection in Drosophila melanogaster.

Sexual conflict over shared traits-intralocus sexual conflict (IaSC)-may be common and consequential, but experimental tests of its relative magnitude are challenging and limited in number. We use a sex-limited selection experiment, designed to subject haplotypes of Drosophila melanogaster to selection for male fitness without opposing selection acting on female fitness. Importantly, we use three novel base populations to compare results with those from the LHM population, the sole population investigated using this technique. In contrast with previous studies, we find that male fitness of haplotypes subject to male-limited selection (ML populations) are not consistently better than their matched (MC) controls when tested in the 'wildtype' state. Males from ML lines did not outperform controls in competitive fitness assays, mate choice trials, fecundity induction or sperm offense tests. As predicted, genetic variation for male fitness was reduced, with low fitness haplotypes apparently removed by selection, but this was only surveyed in one replicate population pair and included a potential artefact in the protocol. Female fitness was markedly reduced by carriage of ML haplotypes, as predicted by sexual antagonism. Hence, our results are only partially consistent with the IaSC hypothesis, raising questions about the relative contribution of sexual conflict to the standing genetic variation in these populations and the potential role of artefacts in the protocol that may have obscured our ability to detect IaSC.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Heredity
Journal of Heredity 生物-遗传学
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
6.50%
发文量
63
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Over the last 100 years, the Journal of Heredity has established and maintained a tradition of scholarly excellence in the publication of genetics research. Virtually every major figure in the field has contributed to the journal. Established in 1903, Journal of Heredity covers organismal genetics across a wide range of disciplines and taxa. Articles include such rapidly advancing fields as conservation genetics of endangered species, population structure and phylogeography, molecular evolution and speciation, molecular genetics of disease resistance in plants and animals, genetic biodiversity and relevant computer programs.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信