Abstract
Recent work has called into question the reality of the rare male mating advantage, pointing out that it could be a statistical artifact of marking flies for behavioral observation or of experimental bias in collecting males. We designed an experiment to test for rare male mating advantage that avoids these sources of bias. Large numbers of males of three Drosophila pseudoobscura karyotypes were allowed to mate with females of one karyotype in population cages. The females were then isolated before multiple mating occurred and their progeny used to diagnose the males that mated them. Populations were studied at five sets of male karyotypic frequencies. The mating success of the male homokaryotypes ST/ST and CH/CH, relative to that of the heterokaryotype ST/CH, was frequency dependent. Both ST/ST and CH/CH males displayed a statistically significant mating advantage at low frequency by comparision with their mating success in the midrange of karyotypic frequencies. Both male homokaryotypes also showed a significantly greater mating success at high homokaryotypic frequency than at intermediate frequencies, which is the same as saying that the heterokaryotype not only failed to show a rare male advantage but actually suffered a mating disadvantage at low frequency. We conclude that rare male mating advantage is not always an experimental or methodological artifact but does occur in laboratory populations of D. pseudoobscura. It may occur for some genotypes and not for others, however, and it may be only one of several forms of frequency-dependent mating behavior operating in a population.
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (830.4 KB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Anderson W. W., Levine L., Olvera O., Powell J. R., de la Rosa M. E., Salceda V. M., Gaso M. I., Guzmán J. Evidence for selection by male mating success in natural populations of Drosophila pseudoobscura. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1979 Mar;76(3):1519–1523. doi: 10.1073/pnas.76.3.1519. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Anderson W. W., Oshima C., Watanabe T., Dobzhansky T., Pavlovsky O. Genetics of natural populations. XXXIX. A test of the possible influence of two insecticides on the chromosomal polymorphism in Drosophila pseudoobscura. Genetics. 1968 Mar;58(3):423–434. doi: 10.1093/genetics/58.3.423. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Anderson W. W., Watanabe T. K. Selection by fertility in Drosophila pseudoobscura. Genetics. 1974 Jul;77(3):559–564. doi: 10.1093/genetics/77.3.559. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Bryant E. H., Kence A., Kimball K. T. A rare-male advantage in the housefly induced by wing clipping and some general considerations for Drosophila. Genetics. 1980 Dec;96(4):975–993. doi: 10.1093/genetics/96.4.975. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Leonard J. E., Ehrman L. Does the rare male advantage result from faulty experimental design? Genetics. 1983 Aug;104(4):713–716. doi: 10.1093/genetics/104.4.713. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Stam P. Estimators for viability in experimental populations, their variances and covarinaces. Theor Popul Biol. 1971 Mar;2(1):51–59. doi: 10.1016/0040-5809(71)90004-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Yardley D. G., Anderson W. W., Schaffer H. E. Gene Frequency Changes at the alpha-Amylase Locus in Experimental Populations of DROSOPHILA PSEUDOOBSCURA. Genetics. 1977 Oct;87(2):357–369. doi: 10.1093/genetics/87.2.357. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]