Reproductive interference via interspecific pairing in an amphipod species complex

Cothran, Rickey D.; Stiff, Andy R.; Chapman, Kristopher; Wellborn, Gary A.; Relyea, Rick A.

doi:10.1007/s00265-013-1564-z

Cited by 15 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Hyallela azteca; Cothran et al, 2013b). This result contrasts with what has been shown in other amphipod species where mixed MOTU pairs failed to produce fertilised eggs (e.g.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 79%

“…While amphipods from MOTUs diverging by approximately 3% paired randomly in the field, suggesting no discrimination, they did not initiate pairings in around 15% of trials in the laboratory. Overall, results suggest that morphologically cryptic MOTUs may have recognition mechanisms preventing, or at least limiting, pair formation between highly genetically divergent individuals (Cothran et al, 2013b). In fact, at least 400 pairs must be sampled to detect a significant deficit of pairing between amphipods originating from MOTUs pairing 85% of the time in the laboratory (see Appendix S1).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For instance, it has been suggested that the relative density of MOTUs in populations may affect mate choice, with individuals from less abundant MOTUs tending to be less choosy than individuals from more prevalent ones (Cothran et al, 2013b). pulex populations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Confrontation of cryptic diversity and mate discrimination within Gammarus pulex and Gammarus fossarum species complexes

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. Freshwater amphipods Gammarus fossarum and Gammarus pulex are widespread in Europe, with some evidence of cryptic diversity in the former. We used DNA barcoding to assess genetic diversity within and among amphipod populations and examined mate discrimination and pre-copulatory pair formation between genetically divergent individuals. 2. Eight distinct G. fossarum and four distinct G. pulex molecular operational taxonomic units (MOTUs) were detected. Among the 33 amphipod populations sampled, 11 contained a single MOTU, 11 had two and 11 were composed of three sympatric MOTUs. Genetic divergences between sympatric MOTUs (G. fossarum and G. pulex MOTUs combined) ranged up to 28% (Kimura two parameter estimates). 3. In amphipod populations containing sympatric MOTUs, pre-copulatory pair formation was random between MOTUs diverging by <4%. However, pre-copulatory pairs involving amphipod individuals from MOTUs diverging by >4% were rare, suggesting mate discrimination between sympatric, highly divergent MOTUs. 4. Although the likelihood decreased with genetic distance between partners, pre-copulatory pair formation in the laboratory can occur between MOTUs diverging by c. 16% and led to successful mating: most female amphipod carried viable, fertilised eggs 48 h post-mating. 5. Data showed high cryptic diversity in the G. fossarum/G. pulex groups, even at a small spatial scale. Mate discrimination between genetically divergent amphipods in natural populations suggests that some of the MOTUs found in G. fossarum and G. pulex may be separated into (sub)species. However, amphipods from different MOTUs can still form pre-copulatory pairs and females produce viable eggs. Overall, data suggest that cryptic diversity is common in the G. fossarum/G. pulex groups and that pre-zygotic isolation through mate discrimination, rather than post-zygotic incompatibility, is likely to drive cryptic speciation.

show abstract

“…Hyallela azteca; Cothran et al, 2013b). This result contrasts with what has been shown in other amphipod species where mixed MOTU pairs failed to produce fertilised eggs (e.g.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 79%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Confrontation of cryptic diversity and mate discrimination within Gammarus pulex and Gammarus fossarum species complexes

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Assuming that cryptic species significantly overlap in their ecological niche space, niche differentiation cannot explain their coexistence (Chesson, 2000). Several studies addressed this issue using various model organisms, including rotifers (Montero-Pau, Ramos-Rodr ıguez, Serra, & G omez, 2011;Ortells, Gomez, & Serra, 2003), nematodes (De Meester, Derycke, Bonte, & Moens, 2011;De Meester et al, 2016;Derycke et al, 2008), different amphipods (Cothran, Henderson, et al, 2013;Cothran, Noyes, & Relyea, 2015;Cothran, Stiff, Chapman, Wellborn, & Relyea, 2013;Dionne, Vergilino, Dufresne, Charles, & Nozais, 2011;Eisenring et al, 2016;Fi ser et al, 2015;Wellborn & Cothran, 2004), chironomids (Pfenninger & Nowak, 2008), bugs (Saleh, Laarif, Clouet, & Gauthier, 2012), bumble bees (Scriven, Whitehorn, Goulson, & Tinsley, 2016), fig wasps (Zhang, Lin, & Hanski, 2004) and bats (Ashrafi, Beck, Rutishauser, Arlettaz, & Bontadina, 2011;Nicholls & Racey, 2006;Rutishauser, Bontadina, Braunisch, Ashrafi, & Arlettaz, 2012). These studies unveiled emerging commonalities in co-occurrence patterns and unsolved issues with important implications for nature conservation.…”

Section: Making Use Of Different Species Criteriamentioning

confidence: 99%

Cryptic species as a window into the paradigm shift of the species concept

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The species concept is the cornerstone of biodiversity science, and any paradigm shift in the delimitation of species affects many research fields. Many biologists now are embracing a new "species" paradigm as separately evolving populations using different delimitation criteria. Individual criteria can emerge during different periods of speciation; some may never evolve. As such, a paradigm shift in the species concept relates to this inherent heterogeneity in the speciation process and species category-which is fundamentally overlooked in biodiversity research. Cryptic species fall within this paradigm shift: they are continuously being reported from diverse animal phyla but are poorly considered in current tests of ecological and evolutionary theory. The aim of this review is to integrate cryptic species in biodiversity science. In the first section, we address that the absence of morphological diversification is an evolutionary phenomenon, a "process" counterpart to the long-studied mechanisms of morphological diversification. In the next section regarding taxonomy, we show that molecular delimitation of cryptic species is heavily biased towards distance-based methods. We also stress the importance of formally naming of cryptic species for better integration into research fields that use species as units of analysis. Finally, we show that incorporating cryptic species leads to novel insights regarding biodiversity patterns and processes, including large-scale biodiversity assessments, geographic variation in species distribution and species coexistence. It is time for incorporating multicriteria species approaches aiming to understand speciation across space and taxa, thus allowing integration into biodiversity conservation while accommodating for species uncertainty.

show abstract

“…Misdirected courtship occurs when an organism directs courtship behaviour towards an individual of a different species and this may then lead to hetero‐specific mating attempts (Ribeiro & Spielman, ; Cothran et al ., ), hetero‐specific mating, and even hybridisation. Our work on lygaeid seed bugs illustrates all these outcomes for Lygaeus equestris Linnaeus (Lygaeoidea) (Burdfield‐Steel et al ., ; Evans et al ., ; Shuker et al ., ).…”

Section: Mechanisms Of Reproductive Interference In Insectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reproductive interference in insects

Shuker

Burdfield‐Steel

2017

Ecological Entomology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. 1. Reproductive interference occurs when members of different species engage in reproductive interactions, leading to a fitness cost to one or both actors.2. These interactions can arise through signal interference ('signal-jamming'), disrupted mate searching, heterospecific rivalry, mate choice errors, or misplaced courtship, mating attempts or copulation.3. We present a definition of reproductive interference (RI) and discuss the extent to which a failure of species discrimination is central to a definition of RI.4. The possible mechanisms of RI are reviewed, using a range of insect examples. 5. Some of the causes and consequences of RI are discussed, focusing in particular on mating systems and mating system evolution.6. We conclude by considering future ways forward, highlighting the opportunities for new theory and tests of the old theory presented by reproductive interference.

show abstract

Reproductive interference via interspecific pairing in an amphipod species complex

Cited by 15 publications

References 52 publications

Confrontation of cryptic diversity and mate discrimination within Gammarus pulex and Gammarus fossarum species complexes

Confrontation of cryptic diversity and mate discrimination within Gammarus pulex and Gammarus fossarum species complexes

Cryptic species as a window into the paradigm shift of the species concept

Reproductive interference in insects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About