Condition-transfer maternal effects modulate sexual conflict

García‐Roa, Roberto; Faria, Gonçalo S.; Noble, Daniel W. A.; Carazo, Pau

doi:10.32942/osf.io/nfmz8

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The significance of this result was quickly recognised. References to SP as a ‘harmful’ or ‘toxic’ trait (Lessells, 2006; Taylor, Wedell & Hosken, 2008; Brown et al ., 2009; Hollis, Fierst & Houle, 2009; Cayetano et al ., 2011; Rankin, Dieckmann & Kokko, 2011; Slatyer et al ., 2012; Bonduriansky, 2014; Brooks & Garratt, 2017; Garcia‐Roa et al ., 2020); ‘reducing’, ‘depressing’, ‘lowering’ or having a ‘negative’, ‘deleterious’, or ‘detrimental’ effect on female fitness (Andrés et al ., 2006; Pröschel, Zhang & Parsch, 2006; Vahed, 2007; Barnes et al ., 2008; Hosken et al ., 2009; Hotzy & Arnqvist, 2009; Karl & Fischer, 2013; Weber, Patlar & Ramm, 2020); coming at a ‘cost to female lifetime reproductive success’ (Holman & Kokko, 2013); imposing ‘net fitness costs’ on females (Alonzo & Pizzari, 2010; Pizzari & Gardner, 2012); or being used to ‘exploit’ or ‘manipulate’ them (Bussiégre et al ., 2006; Fischer, 2007; Reumer, Kraaijeveld & van Alphen, 2007; Hall et al ., 2010; Price et al ., 2010; Adler & Bonduriansky, 2014; Edward, Stockley & Hosken, 2015; Pizzari, Biernaskie & Carazo, 2015; Nallasivan et al ., 2021) have since become widespread. Here was a clear example of a single male trait, identifiable at the level of a single locus and protein, that caused measurable fitness depression in female mates, and where the male trait targeted a female trait that was also identifiable at locus level.…”

Section: Sexual Conflict and Sex Peptide: The Development Of A Paradigmmentioning

confidence: 99%

The evolution of sex peptide: sexual conflict, cooperation, and coevolution

Hopkins

Perry

2022

Biological Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A central paradigm in evolutionary biology is that the fundamental divergence in the fitness interests of the sexes ('sexual conflict') can lead to both the evolution of sex-specific traits that reduce fitness for individuals of the opposite sex, and sexually antagonistic coevolution between the sexes. However, clear examples of traits that evolved in this waywhere a single trait in one sex demonstrably depresses the fitness of members of the opposite sex, resulting in antagonistic coevolutionare rare. The Drosophila seminal protein 'sex peptide' (SP) is perhaps the most widely cited example of a trait that appears to harm females while benefitting males. Transferred in the ejaculate by males during mating, SP triggers profound and wide-ranging changes in female behaviour and physiology. Early studies reported that the transfer of SP enhances male fitness while depressing female fitness, providing the foundations for the widespread view that SP has evolved to manipulate females for male benefit. Here, we argue that this view is (i) a simplification of a wider body of contradictory empirical research, (ii) narrow with respect to theory describing the origin and maintenance of sexually selected traits, and (iii) hard to reconcile with what we know of the evolutionary history of SP's effects on females. We begin by charting the history of thought regarding SP, both at proximate (its production, function, and mechanism of action) and ultimate (its fitness consequences and evolutionary history) levels, reviewing how studies of SP were central to the development of the field of sexual conflict. We describe a prevailing paradigm for SP's evolution: that SP originated and continues to evolve to manipulate females for male benefit. In contrast to this view, we argue on three grounds that the weight of evidence does not support the view that receipt of SP decreases female fitness: (i) results from studies of SP's impact on female fitness are mixed and more often neutral or positive, with fitness costs emerging only under nutritional extremes; (ii) whether costs from SP are appreciable in wild-living populations remains untested; and (iii) recently described confounds in genetic manipulations of SP raise the possibility that measures of the costs and benefits of SP have been distorted. Beyond SP's fitness effects, comparative and genetic data are also difficult to square with the idea that females suffer fitness costs from SP. Instead, these datafrom functional and evolutionary genetics and the neural circuitry of female responses to SPsuggest an evolutionary history involving the evolution of a dedicated SP-sensing apparatus in the female reproductive tract that is likely to have evolved because it benefits females, rather than harms them. We end by exploring theory and evidence that SP benefits females by functioning as a signal of male quality or of sperm receipt and storage (or both). The expanded view of the evolution of SP that we outline recognises the context-dependent and fluctuating roles played by both cooperativ...

show abstract

Section: Sexual Conflict and Sex Peptide: The Development Of A Paradigmmentioning

confidence: 99%

The evolution of sex peptide: sexual conflict, cooperation, and coevolution

Hopkins

Perry

2022

Biological Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Harmful male adaptations are widespread and incredibly diverse and sophisticated across the tree of life (Arnqvist & Rowe, 2005). For example, male harassment of females during pre-copulatory competition for mating has been documented in myriad vertebrate and invertebrate species (García-Roa et al, 2021), driving antagonistic male-female co-evolution in a host of behavioural and morphological traits (Arnqvist & Rowe, 2005). Male harm adaptations in the context of post-copulatory competition are similarly widespread in invertebrates, featuring (amongst others) toxic ejaculates (Wigby & Chapman, 2005), love darts (Koene & Schulenburg, 2005), and a range of male adaptations for traumatic insemination that range from genital ablation to spiny penises (Crudgington & Siva-Jothy, 2000; Lange, Reinhardt, Michiels, & Anthes, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Thermal phenotypic plasticity of pre- and post-copulatory male harm buffers sexual conflict in wildDrosophila melanogaster

Londoño-Nieto

García‐Roa

Garcia-Co

et al. 2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Strong sexual selection frequently leads to sexual conflict and ensuing male harm, whereby males increase their reproductive success at the expense of harming females. Male harm is a widespread evolutionary phenomenon with a strong bearing on population viability. Thus, understanding how it unfolds in the wild is a current priority. Here, we sampled a wild Drosophila melanogaster population and studied male harm across the normal range of temperatures under which it reproduces optimally in nature by comparing female lifetime reproductive success and underlying male harm mechanisms under monogamy (i.e., low male competition/harm) vs. polyandry (i.e., high male competition/harm). While females had equal lifetime reproductive success across temperatures under monogamy, polygamy resulted in a maximum decrease of female fitness at 24 degrees C (relative harm; H = 0.36), reducing its impact at both 20 degrees C (H = 0.22), and 28 degrees C (H = 0.10). Furthermore, female fitness components and pre- (i.e., harassment) and post-copulatory (i.e., ejaculate toxicity) mechanisms of male harm were asymmetrically affected by temperature. At 20 degrees C, male harassment of females was reduced, and high male competition accelerated female actuarial senescence. In contrast, at 28 degrees C male ejaculate effects on female reproduction were modulated, and high male competition mostly resulted in accelerated reproductive ageing. We thus show that, across a natural thermal range, sexual conflict processes and their effects on female fitness components are plastic and complex. As a result, the net effect of male harm on overall population viability is likely to be lower than previously surmised. We discuss how such plasticity may affect selection, adaptation and, ultimately, evolutionary rescue under a warming climate.

show abstract

Condition-transfer maternal effects modulate sexual conflict

Cited by 2 publications

References 49 publications

The evolution of sex peptide: sexual conflict, cooperation, and coevolution

The evolution of sex peptide: sexual conflict, cooperation, and coevolution

Thermal phenotypic plasticity of pre- and post-copulatory male harm buffers sexual conflict in wildDrosophila melanogaster

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About