Miedzygenomowy konflikt plciowy: przeglad badan

• Autorzy: Tilszer M

Warianty tytułu

EN

Sexual conflict: review

• Języki publikacji: PL

Abstrakty

EN

The evolutionary interests of any two individuals are rarely, if ever, identical. This must be true, simply because they do not share the same allels for all loci. Where alleles at a locus differ, there will be competition among them. Because males and tmales, by definition, produce gametes of different size (anizogamy), they typically maximize their reproductive success in more or less different ways. Whenever selection favors different values for a phenotypic trait in males than in females, there is potential for intragenomic (intralocus) sexual conflict. Intragenomic conflict will ppear in all those cases where the direction of selection at a given allele depends upon in which sex it resides (i.e., whenever there is a sex-genotype interaction for fitness). Sexual selection guided by male-female conflicts of interest can result in resolvable evolutionary chases that tend to be unending. It has been reported that in many insects mating involve high costs to females (increased predation risk and energetic expenditure) but few, if any, balancing direct benefits. Sperm-displacement rates are high, and males thus gain from rematings. Mating frequencies are high; males mate multiply for reasons of convenience. In many species, inclouding waterstriders (Heteroptera: Gerridae) males are considered to have won’ the evolutionary conflict over the mating decision in the sense that they have made acceptance of superfluous matings ‘the best of a bad job’ for females, by evolving behavioral and morfological traits that make it costly for females to reject males attempting copulations. Females, however, have apparently evolved a variety of counteradaptations to make males harassmnet, to gain control over mating.

Słowa kluczowe

PL

rozmieszczenie zwierzat; rozmnazanie plciowe; plec; konflikt plci; geny; dziedziczenie mitochondriow; kopulacja; koewolucja; plejotropia; samice; samce

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Wiadomości Ekologiczne
• Rocznik: 2006
• Tom: 52
• Numer: 1
• Opis fizyczny: s.3-16,bibliogr.

Twórcy

autor

Tilszer M

• Uniwersytet Jagiellonski, ul.Gronostajowa 7, 30-387 Krakow

Bibliografia

• Andersson M. 1994 - Sexual selection - Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.
• Andres J. A., Arnqvist G. 2001 - Genetic divergence of the seminal signal-receptor system in housflies: the footprint of sexually antagonistic coevolution? - Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, 268: 399-405.
• Arnqvist G. 1997 - The evolution of water strider mating systems: Causes and consequences of sexual conflicts (W: The evolution of mating systems in insects and arachnids. Red. J. C. Choe, B. J. Crespi) - Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 146-163.
• Arnqvist G. 2004 - Sexual conflict and sexual selection: Lost in the chase - Evolution, 58: .583-1388.
• Arnqvist G., Rowe L. 2005 - Sexual conflict - Princeton University Press, Princeton, Oxford.
• Blanckenhorn W. U. 2002 - The cost of copulating in the dung fly Sepsis cynipsea - Behav. Ecol. 13: 353-358.
• Chapman T., Arnqvist G., Banghem J., Rowe L. 2003 - Sexual conflict - Trends Ecol. Evol. 18: 41-47.
• Chapman T., Lindsay F., Liddle F., Kalb J. M., Wolfner M. F., Patridge L. 1995 - Cost of mating in Drosophila melanogaster is mediated by male eferred males are detrimental for Drosophila melanogaster females - J. Evol. Biol. 16: 797-811.
• Chippindale A. K., Gibson J. R., Rice W. R. 2001-Negative genetic correlation for adult fitness between sexes reversals ontogenetic conflict in Drosophila - Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 98: 1671-1675.
• Cordero C., Eberhard W. G. 2003 - Female choice of sexually antagonistic male adaptation: A critical review of some current research - J. Evol. Biol. 16: 1-6.
• Crudgington H. S, Siva-Jothy M. T. 2000 - Genital damage, kicking and early death - the battle of the sexes take sinister turn in the beanweevil - Nature, 407: 855-856.
• Friberg U., Arnqvist G. 2003 - Fitness effects of female mate choice: Preferred males are detrimental for Drosophila melanogaster females – J. Evol. Biol. 16: 797-811.
• Gavrilets S., Arnqvist G., Friberg U. 2001 - The evolution of mate choice by sexual conflict - Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, 268: 531-539.
• Gems D., Riddle D. L. 1996 - Longevity in Caenorhabditis elegans reduced by mating but not gamete production - Nature, 379: 723-725.
• Gettу T. 1999 - Chase-away sexual selection as noisy reliable signaling - Evolution, 53: 299-302.
• Holland В. 2002 - Sexual selection fails to promote adaptation to a new environment Evolution, 56: 721-730.
• Holland B., Rice W. R.1998 - Chase-away sexual selection: antagonistic seduction versus resistance - Evolution, 52: 1-7
• Holland B., Rice W. R. 1999 - Experimental removal of sexual selection reverses intersexual . antagonistic coevolution and removes a reproductive load - Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 96: 5083-5088.
• Hosken D. J., Garner T. W. J., Ward P. I. 2001 - Sexual conflict selects for male and female reproductive character - Curr. Biol. 11: 489-493.
• Hosken D. J., Martin O. Y., Born J., Huber F. 2003 - Sexual conflict in Sepsis C.: female reluctance, fertility and mate choice - J. Evol. Biol. 16: 485-490.
• Johnstone R. A., Keller L. 2000 - How males can gain by harming their mates: sexual edict, seminal toxins and the cost of mating - Am. Nat. 156: 368-377.
• Knowles L. L., Markow T. A. 2001 - Sexually antagonistic coevolution of a postmating -prezigotic reproductive character in desert Drosophila - Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 98: 8692- 8696.
• Kołodziejczyk A., Koperski P. 2000 - Bezkręgowce słodkowodne Polski. Klucz do oznaczania oraz podstawy biologii i ekologii makrofauny - Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego, Warszawa.
• Krebs J. R., Davies N. В. 2001 - Wprowadzenie do ekologii behawioralnej - Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, Warszawa.
• Krzanowska H., Łomnicki A. (red.) 2002-Zarys mechanizmów ewolucji-Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, Warszawa.
• Lorch P. D., Chao L. 2003 - Selection for multiple mating in females due to mates that reduce female fitness - Behav. Ecol. 14: 679-686.
• Martin O. Y., Hosken D. J. 2003a - The evolution of reproductive isolation through sexual conflict - Nature, 423: 979-982.
• Martin O. Y., Hosken D. J. 2003b - Cost and benefits of evolving under experimentally enforced polyandry or monogamy - Evolution, 57: 2765-2772.
• Maynard Smith J., Szathmary E. 2001 - Tajemnice przełomów w ewolucji. Od narodzin życia do powstania mowy ludzkiej - Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, Warszawa.
• Moore A. J., Gowaty P. A., Wallin W. G., Moore P. J. 2001 - Sexual conflict and the evolution of female mate choice and male social dominance - Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, 268: 517-523.
• Morrow E. H., Arnqvist G., Pitnick S. 2003 - Adaptation versus pleiotropy: why males harm their mates? - Behav. Ecol. 14: 802-806.
• Parker G. A. 1979 - Sexual selection and sexual conflict (W: Sexual selection and reproductive competition in insects. Red. M. S. Blum, N. A. Blum) - Academic Press, New York, 123-166.
• Partridge L., Hurst L. D. 1998 - Sex and conflict - Science, 281: 2003-2008.
• Pitnick S., Brown W. D., Miller G. T. 2001 - Evolution of female remating behaviour following experimental removal of sexual selection - Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, 268: 557-563.
• Pizzari T., Snook R. R. 2003 - Perspective: Sexual conflict and sexual selection: chasing away paradigm shifts - Evolution, 57: 1223-1236.
• Rice W. R. 1992 - Sexually antagonistic genes: experimental evidence - Science, 256: 1436- 1439.
• Rice W. R. 1996 - Sexually antagonistic male adaptation triggered by experimental arrest of female evolution - Nature, 361: 232-234.
• Rice W. R. 1998 - Male fitness increases when females are eliminated from gene pool: implications for the Y chromosome - Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 95: 6217-6221.
• Rice W. R., Chippindale A. K. 2001 - Intersexual ontogenetic conflict - J. Evol. Biol. 14: 685-693.
• Rice W. R., Holland В. 1997 - The enemies within: intergenomic conflict, interlocus contest evolution (ICE) and the intraspecific Red Queen - Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 41: 1-10.
• Rosenthal G. G., Servedio M. R. 1999 - Chase-away sexual selection: Resistance to resistance” - Evolution, 53: 296-299.
• Rowe L., Arnqvist G., Sih A., Krupa J. J. 1994 - Sexual conflict and the evolutionary ecology of matings patterns: water striders as a model system - Trends Ecol. Evol. 9: 289-293.
• Shuster S. M., Wade M. J. 2003 - Mating systems and strategies - Princeton University Press, Princeton, Oxford.
• Snook R. R. 2001 - Sexual selection: conflict,kindness and chicanery - Curr. Biol. 11: R337-R341.
• Vacquier V. D., Swanson W. J., Hellberg M. 1995 - What have we learned about sea urchin sperm binding? - Dev. Growth Deffer. 37:1-10.
• Van Valen L. 1973 - A new evolutionary law - Evol. Theor. 1:1-30.
• Werren J. H., Beukehoom L. W. 1998 - Sex determinaion, sex ratios, and genetic conflict - Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 29:233-261.
• Wolfner M. F. 1997 - Tokens of love: functions and regulations of Drosophila male accessory c end products - Insect Biochem. Molec. Biol. 27: 179-192.
• Zuk M. 2003 - Sexual selection - University of California Press, Berkeley, Los Angeles, London.