Developmental isolation and subsequent adult behavior ofDrosophila paulistorum. III. Alternative rearing

Kim, Yong-Kyu; Koepfer, H. Roberta

doi:10.1007/bf02361156

Cited by 17 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 73 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Increasing this time, as is done in many studies (e.g., 3-4 h in Santibafiez and Waddington 1958; 90 min in Kilias et al 1983; 60 min in Lambert and Henderson 1986), increases the probability of surpassing the critical number of matings and obtaining spurious isolation results. In fact, the use of long observation times would lead to almost 100% of matings (for instance, Ehrman and Parsons 1980;Kim et al 1996).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

DISENTANGLING THE EFFECTS OF MATING PROPENSITY AND MATING CHOICE INDROSOPHILA

et al. 1998

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.-Incipient sexual isolation between genotypes, lines, or populations of the same species is commonly measured in Drosophila by choice tests. Results of these tests are known to be influenced, in an undetermined manner, by the mating propensity of competitors and by discriminatory factors during courtship. We have approached the problem by measuring male and female propensities in separate, independent tests, and by examining whether these estimates could explain the results of the choice tests. First, male and female choice tests were used to measure sexual isolation between populations of Drosophila melanogaster and between populations of D. simulans. Significant deviations from random mating occurred in 31 out of 48 tests, in agreement with the propensity values of the tested genotypes. We conclude that mating propensity instead of discrimination is directly involved in the estimation of sexual isolation in our populations, and advise against the application of male and female choice tests to assess intraspecific isolation without a proper knowledge of the mating propensities of competing individuals. Second, multiple choice tests were used to assess isolation between D. melanogaster populations. In examining the dynamics of matings throughout the test, we show that if competing individuals differ in mating propensities and tests are long enough to allow most matings to happen, a spurious sexual isolation can appear. We recommend that multiple choice tests be terminated once 50 percent of matings had been observed.Key words.-Drosophila, mating choice tests, mating propensity, sexual isolation.Received March 10, 1997.The role of sexual isolation in species formation is one of the most interesting questions in evolutionary biology. Sexual isolation is a form of reproductive isolation arising from behavioral differences between potential mates. The elaborate courtship of most Drosophila species provides good material for the study of sexual behavior. Since Sturtevant's (1915) pioneering work, students of Drosophila have tried to understand how mating differences and sexual selection could lead to speciation.At the intraspecific level, incipient sexual isolation can be seen as a tendency to mate homogamically rather than heterogamically. The underlying divergence in mating behavior between two conspecific strains can be studied in different ways. Unfortunately, a direct analysis of behavioral differences is laborious, time-consuming, and requires a lot of practice and experience (Spiess 1970;Burnet and Connolly 1981;Cobb et al. 1985Cobb et al. , 1986. As a result, the most commonly used designs for measuring sexual isolation in Drosophila are the male choice, female choice, and multiple choice tests (see Parsons 1973), which measure the frequencies of intra-and interstrain matings. The male choice test consists on introducing a male from one strain with a female from his own strain and a female from another strain, in a mating chamber, and recording the types of mating that occur. In the female choice tes...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

DISENTANGLING THE EFFECTS OF MATING PROPENSITY AND MATING CHOICE INDROSOPHILA

et al. 1998

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Drosophila paulistorum Dobzhansky & Pavan malesexperimentally isolated during developmentfail to discriminate appropriate mating partners and are as likely to mount males as females; it seems they need experience during development with conspecifics to know who is and is not a potential mate (Kim et al, 1996). Drosophila paulistorum Dobzhansky & Pavan malesexperimentally isolated during developmentfail to discriminate appropriate mating partners and are as likely to mount males as females; it seems they need experience during development with conspecifics to know who is and is not a potential mate (Kim et al, 1996).…”

Section: Ynamtementioning

confidence: 99%

The evolutionary origins of mating failures and multiple mating

Gowaty

Hubbell

2012

Entomologia Exp Applicata

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Female 'mating failures' seem a paradox similar to the paradox of polyandry. To illustrate the twin paradoxes of female mating failures and polyandry, we assume that individuals, not sexes, trade-off time available for mating with immediate fitness increments or decrements that would be conferred by alternative potential mates. We use Hubbell & Johnson's (1987) [analytical mating theory (H&J), the first sex-neutral null model of stochastic demography on variance in lifetime mating and adaptive behavior, as well as another sex-neutral null model, the Switch Point Theorem (SPT) (Gowaty & Hubbell, 2009). The H&J mating theory and SPT predict adaptive behavior of individuals accepting and rejecting potential mates without recourse to scenarios for the evolution of sex differences via anisogamy or parental investment. Sex-neutral models begin with individuals, not sexes. Null models assume no pre-existing sex-specific adaptations. H&J's mating theory and the SPT are discrete time absorbing Markov models that count the times individuals enter states such as receptivity, mating, latency to onset to receptivity, and death. H&J's model and the SPT are analytical solutions for the variance in mating success and the variance in reproductive success, as well as for the fraction of potential mates that are acceptable as mates to a given individual when potential mates differ in the fitness that they would confer to a given mating partner. In H&J's model, there are only two qualities of mates; in the SPT, there are n qualities of mates, where n = the number of potential mates in the population. Thus, both models predict mating failures and multiple mating for both sexes under similar or different demographic circumstances, including the fitness background (the fitness distribution of the pool of potential mates) under which individuals make reproductive decisions. In addition, we conducted numerical experiments using DYNAMATE © , a dynamic, agent-based (object-oriented) simulation program that tracks dynamically the fate and interactions of all individuals in a single population over a reproductive season. DYNAMATE embodies the analytical solutions of the SPT as rules that determine individually adaptive reproductive decisions. With DYNAMATE we studied how moment-to-moment changes in demographic circumstances change individual behavior and trajectories of mating opportunities under the rules of the SPT that determined for each individual each of its adaptive (fitness enhancing) reproductive decisions. The models demonstrate that the pathways to life-long virginity and multiple mating reside in: (1) variation in individual lifespan; (2) variation in encounters with potential mates; (3) adaptive acceptance or rejection of potential mates as actual mates, which in the case of rejection of all encountered potential mates, results in life-long virginity, a 'fitness trap'; (4) opposite-sex acceptances or rejections of potential mates as mates; and/or (5) some combination of (1)-(4). The models make quantitative predictions about lif...

show abstract

“…However, the possibility of an influence of the conditions encountered in the egg stage on the behavior of the adult flies has been repeatedly demonstrated in a series of experiments by Kim et al (1996). The authors found that mixed culturing of eggs from different semispecies of the Drosophila paulistorum group weakened selectively the mutual attraction of adult females and males from different semispecies.…”

Section: Development and Retention Of Odor Indifferencementioning

confidence: 99%