Sex‐biased transcriptome divergence along a latitudinal gradient

Allen, Scott L.; Bonduriansky, Russell; Sgrò, Carla M.; Chenoweth, Stephen F.

doi:10.1111/mec.14015

Cited by 27 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 137 publications

(291 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In a previous experiment, I found that many more male-biased than female-biased genes diverged genetically among eight D. serrata populations (Chapter 3) (Allen et al 2017a). A similar result has also been observed among two D. melanogaster populations (Hutter et al 2008;Muller et al 2011;Huylmans and Parsch 2014).…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 60%

“…Third, as previously described (Chapter 3) (Allen et al 2017a), sexspecific gene expression of eight wild populations was measured to assess potential constraints to population-specific divergence in SBGE.…”

Section: Biological Samples Rna Extraction and Microarray Hybridisationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Population divergence in gene expression has been previously assessed (Chapter 3) (Allen et al 2017a To assess constraints on sex-specific population divergence, the magnitude of divergence was measured using a local effect size known as Cohen's f 2 (see [4] below) for the sex × pop interaction from model [3] and correlated with between-sex (r(m,f)) and between-trait pleiotropy (t);…”

Section: Population Divergence In Sex-biased Gene Expressionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Despite apparent constraints on the evolution of SBGE, male-biased genes are some of the fastest evolving genes in a diverse range of species (Ellegren and Parsch 2007;Parsch and Ellegren 2013), both in terms of protein coding sequence Meisel 2011) and gene expression levels (Ellegren and Parsch 2007), an observation I also made in relation to microevolutionary divergence among eight D. serrata populations (Chapter 3) (Allen et al 2017a). Here, I aim to empirically address several possible explanations for the accelerated evolution of male-biased genes that are yet to be explored.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Sex-biased genes are genes expressed at a higher level in one sex compared to the other and are a common feature of the transcriptomes of sexual species (Ellegren and Parsch 2007;Parsch and Ellegren 2013;Ingleby et al 2015), including the focal species of this study, Drosophila serrata (Chapter 2 and 3) (Allen et al 2013;Allen et al 2017a). For the most part, sex-biased gene expression (SBGE) likely reflects historical selection for different phenotypic optima in males and females as it is a prime mechanism for how a shared genome could produce sexually dimorphic traits (Ellegren and Parsch 2007;Williams and Carroll 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

The evolution of sex-biased gene expression in Drosophila serrata

Allen¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sexual reproduction is an ancient biological process and in most species, has resulted in the evolution of two distinct sexes; females that are typically categorised as producing relatively large and metabolically costly gametes, and males that produce smaller less costly gametes. Such differences between the sexes can result in discordant selection pressures where, for example, males are selected for a fast mating rate, whereas it is beneficial for females to reproduce less often. Because the sexes share a genome, such discordant selection can create an intralocus sexual conflict, where an allele can be simultaneously beneficial in one sex while being detrimental in the other. Ultimately, the resolution of intralocus sexual conflict occurs via the evolution of sexual dimorphism, which allows each sex to approach its individual fitness optimum. A prime mechanism for the evolution of sexual dimorphism is sex-biased gene expression, where males and females express the shared genome differently to produce distinct phenotypes.Sex-biased gene expression (SBGE) appears to be a common feature of dioecious species and during my PhD candidature, I studied the following aspects of the evolution of SBGE in the Australian vinegar fly Drosophila serrata. 1) A deficit of male-biased X-linked genes has been observed in several other species. I assessed the possibility that such a nonrandom distribution of sex-biased genes in D. serrata is a by-product of dosage compensation rather than selection. I found that both selection and dosage compensation likely play a part. 2) While the rapid evolution of male-biased genes is a strikingly consistent pattern of divergence between species, I asked whether the same patterns occur for divergence among populations within species spanning a latitudinal gradient. I found that the patterns are indeed reflective, and I also discovered that many more genes diverged in males than females. Because a lot of the malespecific divergence did not clinally vary with latitude, as might be expected of spatially variable natural selection, I hypothesised that male-driven divergence might be in response to stronger sexual selection on males, which may occur on a population-specific scale. 3) While comparisons of protein coding sequence between species indicate that positive selection is a possible explanation for the rapid evolution of male-biased genes, I found support for several other explanations in relation to the evolution of gene expression of male-biased genes in D.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 60%

Section: Biological Samples Rna Extraction and Microarray Hybridisationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Population Divergence In Sex-biased Gene Expressionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The evolution of sex-biased gene expression in Drosophila serrata

Allen¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Thermal tolerance and preference are both consistent with the clinal distribution of house fly proto-Y chromosomes

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Selection pressures can vary within localized areas and across massive geographical scales. Temperature is one of the best studied ecologically variable abiotic factors that can affect selection pressures across multiple spatial scales. Organisms rely on physiological (thermal tolerance) and behavioral (thermal preference) mechanisms to thermoregulate in response to environmental temperature. In addition, spatial heterogeneity in temperatures can select for local adaptation in thermal tolerance, thermal preference, or both. However, the concordance between thermal tolerance and preference across genotypes and sexes within species and across populations is greatly understudied. The house fly, Musca domestica, is a well‐suited system to examine how genotype and environment interact to affect thermal tolerance and preference. Across multiple continents, house fly males from higher latitudes tend to carry the male‐determining gene on the Y chromosome, whereas those from lower latitudes usually have the male determiner on the third chromosome. We tested whether these two male‐determining chromosomes differentially affect thermal tolerance and preference as predicted by their geographical distributions. We identify effects of genotype and developmental temperature on male thermal tolerance and preference that are concordant with the natural distributions of the chromosomes, suggesting that temperature variation across the species range contributes to the maintenance of the polymorphism. In contrast, female thermal preference is bimodal and largely independent of congener male genotypes. These sexually dimorphic thermal preferences suggest that temperature‐dependent mating dynamics within populations could further affect the distribution of the two chromosomes. Together, the differences in thermal tolerance and preference across sexes and male genotypes suggest that different selection pressures may affect the frequencies of the male‐determining chromosomes across different spatial scales.

show abstract