Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Genetics logoLink to Genetics
. 1999 Feb;151(2):865–884. doi: 10.1093/genetics/151.2.865

The reinforcement of mating preferences on an island.

M Kirkpatrick 1, M R Servedio 1
PMCID: PMC1460501  PMID: 9927476

Abstract

We develop a haploid model for the reinforcement of female mating preferences on an island that receives migrants from a continent. We find that preferences will evolve to favor island males under a broad range of conditions: when the average male display trait on the island and continent differ, when the preference acts on that difference, and when there is standing genetic variance for the preference. A difference between the mean display trait on the continent and on the island is sufficient to drive reinforcement of preferences. Additional postzygotic isolation, caused, for example, by either epistatic incompatibility or ecological selection against hybrids, will amplify reinforcement but is not necessary. Under some conditions, the degree of preference reinforcement is a simple function of quantities that can be estimated entirely from phenotypic data. We go on to study how postzygotic isolation caused by epistatic incompatibilities affects reinforcement of the preference. With only one pair of epistatic loci, reinforcement is enhanced by tighter linkage between the preference genes and the genes causing hybrid incompatibility. Reinforcement of the preference is also affected by the number of epistatically interacting genes involved in incompatibility, independent of the overall intensity of selection against hybrids.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (246.0 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Balkau B. J., Feldman M. W. Selection for migration modification. Genetics. 1973 May;74(1):171–174. doi: 10.1093/genetics/74.1.171. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Barton N. H., Turelli M. Natural and sexual selection on many loci. Genetics. 1991 Jan;127(1):229–255. doi: 10.1093/genetics/127.1.229. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Coyne J. A. Genetics and speciation. Nature. 1992 Feb 6;355(6360):511–515. doi: 10.1038/355511a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Coyne J. A. The genetic basis of Haldane's rule. 1985 Apr 25-May 1Nature. 314(6013):736–738. doi: 10.1038/314736a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Davis A. W., Noonburg E. G., Wu C. I. Evidence for complex genic interactions between conspecific chromosomes underlying hybrid female sterility in the Drosophila simulans clade. Genetics. 1994 May;137(1):191–199. doi: 10.1093/genetics/137.1.191. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Grant P. R., Grant B. R. Genetics and the origin of bird species. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997 Jul 22;94(15):7768–7775. doi: 10.1073/pnas.94.15.7768. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Hollocher H., Wu C. I. The genetics of reproductive isolation in the Drosophila simulans clade: X vs. autosomal effects and male vs. female effects. Genetics. 1996 Jul;143(3):1243–1255. doi: 10.1093/genetics/143.3.1243. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Iwasa Y., Pomiankowski A. Continual change in mate preferences. Nature. 1995 Oct 5;377(6548):420–422. doi: 10.1038/377420a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Kelly J. K., Noor M. A. Speciation by reinforcement: a model derived from studies of Drosophila. Genetics. 1996 Jul;143(3):1485–1497. doi: 10.1093/genetics/143.3.1485. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Kimura M. Attainment of Quasi Linkage Equilibrium When Gene Frequencies Are Changing by Natural Selection. Genetics. 1965 Nov;52(5):875–890. doi: 10.1093/genetics/52.5.875. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Kirkpatrick M., Barton N. H. The strength of indirect selection on female mating preferences. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997 Feb 18;94(4):1282–1286. doi: 10.1073/pnas.94.4.1282. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Lande R. Models of speciation by sexual selection on polygenic traits. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1981 Jun;78(6):3721–3725. doi: 10.1073/pnas.78.6.3721. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Nagylaki T. The evolution of one- and two-locus systems. Genetics. 1976 Jul;83(3 PT2):583–600. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Noor M. A. Speciation driven by natural selection in Drosophila. Nature. 1995 Jun 22;375(6533):674–675. doi: 10.1038/375674a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Sved J. A. A two-sex polygenic model for the evolution of premating isolation. I. Deterministic theory for natural populations. Genetics. 1981 Jan;97(1):197–215. doi: 10.1093/genetics/97.1.197. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Turelli M., Orr H. A. The dominance theory of Haldane's rule. Genetics. 1995 May;140(1):389–402. doi: 10.1093/genetics/140.1.389. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Wagner A., Wagner G. P., Similion P. Epistasis can facilitate the evolution of reproductive isolation by peak shifts: a two-locus two-allele model. Genetics. 1994 Oct;138(2):533–545. doi: 10.1093/genetics/138.2.533. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Wu C. I., Palopoli M. F. Genetics of postmating reproductive isolation in animals. Annu Rev Genet. 1994;28:283–308. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ge.28.120194.001435. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Genetics are provided here courtesy of Oxford University Press

RESOURCES