Skip to main content
PMC home page
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences logoLink to Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
. 1999 Jul 7;266(1426):1341–1345. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1999.0785

Meiotic drive and evolution of female choice.

K Reinhold 1, L Engqvist 1, B Misof 1, J Kurtz 1
PMCID: PMC1690076  PMID: 10445289

Abstract

As a special version of the good-genes hypothesis, it was recently proposed that females could benefit from choosing drive-resistant males in a meiotic drive system. Here, we examine with a three-locus, six-allele population genetic model whether female choice for drive resistance can evolve. An allele leading to female preference for drive-resistant males was introduced at low frequency into a population polymorphic for meiotic drive and drive resistance. Our simulations show that female choice of drive-resistant males is disadvantageous when resistance is Y-linked. This disadvantage occurs because, at equilibrium, drive-resistant males have lower reproductive success than drive-susceptible males. Thus, female choice of drive-susceptible males can evolve when resistance is Y-linked. When resistance is autosomal, selection on female choice for drive resistance is less strong and depends on the frequency of choice: female preference of resistant males is favoured when choice is rare and disadvantageous when choice is frequent, leading to a stable equilibrium at a low frequency of the choice allele. Independent of the location of drive resistance alleles, males with the non-driving allele always have above average reproductive success. Female choice is therefore beneficial when choosy females prefer males with the non-driving allele.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (364.8 KB).

Selected References

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

  1. Carvalho A. B., Vaz S. C., Klaczko L. B. Polymorphism for Y-linked suppressors of sex-ratio in two natural populations of Drosophila mediopunctata. Genetics. 1997 Jul;146(3):891–902. doi: 10.1093/genetics/146.3.891. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Cazemajor M., Landré C., Montchamp-Moreau C. The sex-ratio trait in Drosophila simulans: genetic analysis of distortion and suppression. Genetics. 1997 Oct;147(2):635–642. doi: 10.1093/genetics/147.2.635. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Charlesworth B., Coyne J. A., Orr H. A. Meiotic drive and unisexual hybrid sterility: a comment. Genetics. 1993 Feb;133(2):421–432. doi: 10.1093/genetics/133.2.421. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Clark A. G. Natural selection and Y-linked polymorphism. Genetics. 1987 Mar;115(3):569–577. doi: 10.1093/genetics/115.3.569. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Crow J. F. Genes that violate Mendel's rules. Sci Am. 1979 Feb;240(2):134-43, 146. doi: 10.1038/scientificamerican0279-134. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Curtsinger J. W., Feldman M. W. Experimental and Theoretical Analysis of the "Sex-Ratio" Polymorphism in DROSOPHILA PSEUDOOBSCURA. Genetics. 1980 Feb;94(2):445–466. doi: 10.1093/genetics/94.2.445. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Hamilton W. D. Extraordinary sex ratios. A sex-ratio theory for sex linkage and inbreeding has new implications in cytogenetics and entomology. Science. 1967 Apr 28;156(3774):477–488. doi: 10.1126/science.156.3774.477. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Hamilton W. D., Zuk M. Heritable true fitness and bright birds: a role for parasites? Science. 1982 Oct 22;218(4570):384–387. doi: 10.1126/science.7123238. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Hurst L. D. Selfish genes and meiotic drive. Nature. 1998 Jan 15;391(6664):223–223. doi: 10.1038/34526. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Lyttle T. W. Experimental population genetics of meiotic drive systems. I. Pseudo-Y chromosomal drive as a means of eliminating cage populations of Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics. 1977 Jun;86(2 Pt 1):413–445. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1998.0561. [DOI] [PMC free article] [Google Scholar]
  12. Presgraves D. C., Severance E., Wilkinson G. S. Sex chromosome meiotic drive in stalk-eyed flies. Genetics. 1997 Nov;147(3):1169–1180. doi: 10.1093/genetics/147.3.1169. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Williams J. R., Lenington S. Factors modulating preferences of female house mice for males differing in t-complex genotype: role of t-complex genotype, genetic background, and estrous condition of females. Behav Genet. 1993 Jan;23(1):51–58. doi: 10.1007/BF01067553. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Wu C. I., True J. R., Johnson N. Fitness reduction associated with the deletion of a satellite DNA array. Nature. 1989 Sep 21;341(6239):248–251. doi: 10.1038/341248a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Wu C. I. Virility Deficiency and the Sex-Ratio Trait in DROSOPHILA PSEUDOOBSCURA. I. Sperm Displacement and Sexual Selection. Genetics. 1983 Nov;105(3):651–662. doi: 10.1093/genetics/105.3.651. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences are provided here courtesy of The Royal Society

RESOURCES