Developmental Environment Effects on Sexual Selection in Male and Female Drosophila melanogaster.

Juliano Morimoto, Tommaso Pizzari, Stuart Wigby
Author Information
  1. Juliano Morimoto: Department of Zoology, Edward Grey Institute, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PS, United Kingdom.
  2. Tommaso Pizzari: Department of Zoology, Edward Grey Institute, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PS, United Kingdom.
  3. Stuart Wigby: Department of Zoology, Edward Grey Institute, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PS, United Kingdom.

Abstract

The developmental environment can potentially alter the adult social environment and influence traits targeted by sexual selection such as body size. In this study, we manipulated larval density in male and female Drosophila melanogaster, which results in distinct adult size phenotypes-high (low) densities for small (large) adults-and measured sexual selection in experimental groups consisting of adult males and females from high, low, or a mixture of low and high larval densities. Overall, large adult females (those reared at low larval density) had more matings, more mates and produced more offspring than small females (those reared at high larval density). The number of offspring produced by females was positively associated with their number of mates (i.e. there was a positive female Bateman gradient) in social groups where female size was experimentally varied, likely due to the covariance between female productivity and mating rate. For males, we found evidence that the larval environment affected the relative importance of sexual selection via mate number (Bateman gradients), mate productivity, paternity share, and their covariances. Mate number and mate productivity were significantly reduced for small males in social environments where males were of mixed sizes, versus social environments where all males were small, suggesting that social heterogeneity altered selection on this subset of males. Males are commonly assumed to benefit from mating with large females, but in contrast to expectations we found that in groups where both the male and female size varied, males did not gain more offspring per mating with large females. Collectively, our results indicate sex-specific effects of the developmental environment on the operation of sexual selection, via both the phenotype of individuals, and the phenotype of their competitors and mates.

Associated Data

Dryad | 10.5061/dryad.cg0gn

References

  1. Hereditas. 2000;132(3):243-7 [PMID: 11075519]
  2. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2001 Aug;76(3):305-39 [PMID: 11569787]
  3. Nature. 2002 Jan 17;415(6869):254-6 [PMID: 11796975]
  4. Curr Biol. 2002 Jan 22;12(2):121-3 [PMID: 11818062]
  5. Proc Biol Sci. 2002 Sep 7;269(1502):1821-8 [PMID: 12350270]
  6. Proc Biol Sci. 2003 Oct 7;270(1528):2065-71 [PMID: 14561296]
  7. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004 Aug 17;101(33):12342-7 [PMID: 15302936]
  8. Mech Ageing Dev. 2005 Mar;126(3):407-16 [PMID: 15664627]
  9. Curr Biol. 2005 Feb 8;15(3):271-5 [PMID: 15694313]
  10. Proc Biol Sci. 2006 Apr 22;273(1589):917-22 [PMID: 16627276]
  11. Nature. 2006 Jun 8;441(7094):742-5 [PMID: 16760976]
  12. Curr Biol. 2006 Sep 5;16(17):R755-65 [PMID: 16950102]
  13. J Evol Biol. 2007 Jan;20(1):381-91 [PMID: 17210031]
  14. Evolution. 2007 Aug;61(8):2027-34 [PMID: 17683443]
  15. Biol Lett. 2007 Dec 22;3(6):607-10 [PMID: 17711815]
  16. Evolution. 2007 Nov;61(11):2457-68 [PMID: 17725639]
  17. Science. 2007 Dec 21;318(5858):1882-5 [PMID: 18096798]
  18. Curr Biol. 2008 Jul 8;18(13):R553-4 [PMID: 18606122]
  19. Curr Biol. 2009 May 12;19(9):751-7 [PMID: 19361995]
  20. Trends Ecol Evol. 2009 Jun;24(6):297-304 [PMID: 19403194]
  21. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009 Jun 16;106 Suppl 1:10001-8 [PMID: 19528643]
  22. Trends Ecol Evol. 2010 Mar;25(3):145-52 [PMID: 19853321]
  23. PLoS Biol. 2009 Dec;7(12):e1000254 [PMID: 19997646]
  24. Am Nat. 2010 Feb;175(2):174-85 [PMID: 20028216]
  25. Science. 2010 Apr 16;328(5976):354-7 [PMID: 20299550]
  26. Evolution. 2010 Sep;64(9):2746-57 [PMID: 20408874]
  27. Proc Biol Sci. 2011 Apr 22;278(1709):1171-6 [PMID: 20880887]
  28. Evolution. 2011 Feb;65(2):564-73 [PMID: 21044054]
  29. Integr Comp Biol. 2005 Nov;45(5):895-902 [PMID: 21676840]
  30. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 Feb 7;109(6):2049-53 [PMID: 22308337]
  31. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 May 29;109(22):8641-5 [PMID: 22592795]
  32. Evolution. 2012 Aug;66(8):2646-53 [PMID: 22834761]
  33. Evolution. 2012 Oct;66(10):3111-29 [PMID: 23025602]
  34. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2013 Jan 21;368(1613):20120335 [PMID: 23339245]
  35. PLoS One. 2013;8(2):e56299 [PMID: 23405271]
  36. Evolution. 2013 Jul;67(7):1926-36 [PMID: 23815650]
  37. Evolution. 2013 Oct;67(10):2849-60 [PMID: 24094338]
  38. Evolution. 2014 May;68(5):1320-31 [PMID: 24410424]
  39. Proc Biol Sci. 2014 Mar 19;281(1782):20132973 [PMID: 24648220]
  40. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 2009 Aug 1;63(10):1505-1513 [PMID: 24733957]
  41. Am Nat. 2014 May;183(5):638-49 [PMID: 24739196]
  42. Evolution. 2014 Dec;68(12):3421-32 [PMID: 25226860]
  43. Am Nat. 2015 Jun;185(6):756-68 [PMID: 25996861]
  44. Nat Commun. 2015 Sep 15;6:8291 [PMID: 26369735]
  45. Funct Ecol. 2016 Mar;30(3):410-419 [PMID: 27546947]
  46. Evolution. 1995 Dec;49(6):1147-1157 [PMID: 28568519]
  47. Proc Biol Sci. 1996 Jun 22;263(1371):755-9 [PMID: 8763795]
  48. Development. 1998 Aug;125(15):2943-50 [PMID: 9655816]
  49. Anim Behav. 1998 Dec;56(6):1311-1321 [PMID: 9933527]

Grants

  1. BB/K014544/1/Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council

MeSH Term

Animals
Drosophila melanogaster
Environment
Female
Larva
Male
Mating Preference, Animal
Reproduction

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0malesfemalessocialselectionlarvalfemaleenvironmentadultsexualsizelowsmalllargenumberdensitygroupshighmatesoffspringproductivitymatingmatedevelopmentalmaleDrosophilamelanogasterresultsdensitiesrearedproducedBatemanvariedfoundviaenvironmentsphenotypecanpotentiallyalterinfluencetraitstargetedbodystudymanipulateddistinctphenotypes-highadults-andmeasuredexperimentalconsistingmixtureOverallmatingspositivelyassociatediepositivegradientexperimentallylikelyduecovariancerateevidenceaffectedrelativeimportancegradientspaternitysharecovariancesMatesignificantlyreducedmixedsizesversussuggestingheterogeneityalteredsubsetMalescommonlyassumedbenefitcontrastexpectationsgainperCollectivelyindicatesex-specificeffectsoperationindividualscompetitorsDevelopmentalEnvironmentEffectsSexualSelectionMaleFemale

Similar Articles

Cited By