User:JanuarytheCalico/sandbox

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Interlocus Sexual Conflict[edit]

Interlocus sexual conflict is a type of sexual conflict that occurs through the interaction of a set of antagonistic alleles at two or more different loci, or the location of a gene on a chromosome, in males and females, resulting in the deviation of either or both sexes from the fitness optima for the traits.[1] A co-evolutionary arms race is established between the sexes in which either sex evolves a set of antagonistic adaptations that is detrimental to the fitness of the other sex.[2] The potential for reproductive success in one organism is strengthened while the fitness of the opposite sex is weakened. Interlocus sexual conflict can arise due to aspects of male–female interactions such as mating frequency, fertilization, relative parental effort, female remating behavior, and female reproductive rate.[3]

As the sexes demonstrate a significant investment discrepancy for reproduction, interlocus sexual conflict can arise. To achieve reproductive success, a species member will display reproductive characteristics that enhance their ability to reproduce, regardless of whether the fitness of their mate is negatively affected.[4] Sperm production by males is substantially less biologically costly than egg production by females, and sperm are produced in much greater quantities. Consequently, males invest more energy into mating frequency, while females are choosier with mates and invest their energy into offspring quality.[5]

The evolutionary pathways resulting from interlocus sexual conflict form part of interlocus contest evolution, a theory describing the coevolution of different loci in a species through the process of intergenomic conflict.[6] This has lead to the proposal that sexual antagonistic coevolution is fueled by interlocus sexual conflict.[6]

Well-evidenced examples come exclusively from the insect world, with the majority of research being conducted in yellow dung flies, Scathophaga stercoraria, and fruit flies, Drosophila melanogaster. Examples outside of these taxa are theoretical, though currently not well studied.[7]

Interlocus sexual conflict differs from intralocus sexual conflict, a similar theory in which a set of antagonistic alleles resides on the same locus in both sexes.

Theory development[edit]

Models of interlocus sexual conflict[edit]

The first model of interlocus sexual conflict, the genetic threshold model, was developed by Parker to explain sexual conflict among yellow dung flies.[2] Further investigation of sexual conflict theory remained relatively untouched until Rice predicted that genes for sexually antagonistic traits exist at the same loci of the sex chromosomes in both sexes, which lead to the development of intralocus sexual conflict. Rice’s genetic model of X-linkage influencing sexual dimorphism demonstrated that alleles for reproductive traits will persist if they increase the fitness of one sex, regardless of the associated cost for their mate.[8]

An expansion of Parker’s genetic threshold model was later used to examine how sex-linked harming alleles, or mutant alleles that cause males to harm females during reproduction, proliferate within a population and initiate interlocus sexual conflict.[9] In a population of fruit flies where a Y-linked harming allele decreases the fitness of a female mate, an indirect cost is imposed on the male’s fitness. Consequently, the harming allele is only favored in circumstances where the difference between offspring sired by harming males and normal males is greater for harming males, or harming males are at a fitness advantage.

The chase-away sexual selection model, proposed by Holland and Rice, enabled the prediction that mating discrimination by females will drive the evolution of male display features toward extreme phenotypes. As a result, an arms race develops where female mate choice drives male morphology.[10] A model of antagonistic coevolution by Arnqvist and Rowe highlighted the example of abdominal spines in female water striders, Gerris incognitus, to demonstrate how this arms race leads to evolutionary adaptations in females. Female water striders achieve control over copulatory acts by using their spines as defense against aggressive males.[11]

Interlocus contest evolution[edit]

Interlocus sexual conflict forms the basis for interlocus contest evolution (ICE), characterized by the coevolution of genes at different loci in a species through intergenomic conflict.[6] In other words, a disequilibrium forms as alleles for reproductive traits are substituted at different loci in opposing sexes, resulting in rapid evolution of the trait at the locus, which further fuels an arms race between the sexes.

The Red Queen hypothesis postulates that evolution of a trait in one species will drive antagonistic coevolution in an opposing species and can be used to explain coevolution in cases of predatory behaviour, host-parasite relationships, and sexual selection.[12] Of interest to interlocus sexual conflict, the Red Queen hypothesis allows for the evolution of traits that enhance reproductive fitness.[6] ICE extends from this hypothesis, proposing that antagonistic coevolution does not require opposing species, but can be applied to genes at different loci in a single species.

Versus intralocus sexual conflict[edit]

The genetic basis of the distinction between interlocus sexual conflict and intralocus sexual conflict is the location of the interacting antagonistic alleles. Conflict in which the antagonistic alleles are located at the same locus is termed intralocus sexual conflict.[13] This occurs when males and females undergo different selective pressures at the same locus, resulting in either sex limiting the fitness of the other sex.[14]

Importantly, many examples of sexual conflict are not categorized into interlocus sexual conflict or intralocus sexual conflict, as the genetic locations of the interacting alleles for these traits are not known or specified. It is critical to note when interpreting information regarding sexual conflict that these terms are sometimes used interchangeably, despite this being incorrect.[15]

Antagonistic coevolution[edit]

Sexual antagonistic coevolution is characterized by an arms race between the sexes in which one sex experiences changes in morphology or behaviour to compensate for the negative effects of the reproductive traits of the opposite sex. Both sexes strive to maintain an optimal fitness level, but do so at the expense of their mate's fitness. For interlocus sexual conflict to be a valid cause of antagonistic coevolution, the harm induced by the males across all loci has to outweigh the indirect benefits that the females gain by interacting with males.[16]

Copulation in Scathophaga stercoraria

In Scathophaga stercoraria[edit]

Through Parker’s genetic threshold model, it was discovered that female yellow dung flies can be injured in battles between male suitors. Males are selected to evolve traits for competitive ability that would increase their reproductive success, but females would evolve a set of antagonistic adaptations to reduce their chances of being injured during these interactions.[2] Male yellow dung flies use pheromones, seminal fluid proteins (SPFs), and aggressive behaviour attributable to their size to manipulate females during courtship. As yellow dung flies are a polyandrous species, females obtain sperm from multiple males which is stored for fertilization. Larger males have a competitive advantage in displacing the sperm of other males, enhancing the likelihood of their sperm fertilizing the eggs.[17] This phenomenon is termed sperm competition. In response, females have evolved larger spermathecae, spermicides, and an enhanced ability to select sperm based on the fitness of male suitors.

Scathophaga stercoraria displaying either polyandry or monogamy differ in female fitness. When females are placed in enforced polyandrous or monogamous mating conditions, females from polyandrous conditions exhibit substantially reduced fitness, displaying decreased egg production, decreased number of offspring, and a shortened life span compared to monogamous females after only one mating experience.[18] Initially, it was suggested that the Sexy son hypothesis was enough to compensate for the direct impact of antagonistic coevolution on female fitness[9]. However, the detrimental fitness impact in females singly-mated with a polyandrous male suggests adaptations to resist harm by males requires competition, and is therefore better explained by interlocus sexual conflict.[18]

In Drosophila melanogaster[edit]

Copulation in Drosophila melanogaster

Drosophila melanogaster are a promiscuous species in which mate choice is a recurring event, fostering the development of interlocus sexual conflict.[19]

The ejaculate of male fruit flies contains seminal fluid proteins (SFPs) that play a significant role in determining female fitness.[19] SPFs are capable of influencing processes such as oogenesis,[20] sperm storage,[21] and the onset of ovulation.[22] This ultimately leads to a decrease in female fitness, as increasing behaviours such as egg-laying can decrease the success of fertilization,[23] delay remating,[20] and impact the female’s life span.[24] In response to the negative effects of SPFs, female fruit flies have evolved resistance tactics to hyperactive males and refractoriness, resulting in interlocus sexual conflict. This has been supported in studies revealing the rapid evolution of SPF genes.[25]

In a study examining fruit flies under polygamous and monogamous conditions, it was discovered that antagonistic coevolution decreases in monogamy, as the organisms mate with only one opposite-sex member and there is no competition among males to mate with the female.[19]

In another laboratory study, a mutation that reduces the attractiveness of females was introduced into the genome of the experimental females. By reducing the attractiveness of the females expressing the trait, the mutation provided females with resistance to the direct costs of re-mating and male courtship. These results show that the resistance allele significantly accumulated in the experimental group, suggesting that the direct costs of male-courtship are greater than the indirect benefits of male-courtship [16]

Reciprocal crosses of Drosophila melanogaster have been used to investigate the evolution of sexual traits under allopatric conditions. In divergent populations, organisms will respond adaptively to local mates but not foreign mates. As a result, the female remating rate decreased significantly upon introduction of foreign males. Females are most resistant to males they coevolved with in local conditions, but show limited defense against foreign males.[26]

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^ Chapman, Tracey; Arnqvist, Göran; Bangham, Jenny; Rowe, Locke (2003-01). "Sexual conflict". Trends in Ecology & Evolution. 18 (1): 41–47. doi:10.1016/s0169-5347(02)00004-6. ISSN 0169-5347. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  2. ^ a b c Parker, G.A. (1979), "SEXUAL SELECTION AND SEXUAL CONFLICT", Sexual Selection and Reproductive Competition in Insects, Elsevier, pp. 123–166, ISBN 9780121087500, retrieved 2019-10-27
  3. ^ Parker, G.A (2006-02-28). "Sexual conflict over mating and fertilization: an overview". Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 361 (1466): 235–259. doi:10.1098/rstb.2005.1785. ISSN 0962-8436. PMC 1569603. PMID 16612884.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: PMC format (link)
  4. ^ Pennell, Tanya M.; Morrow, Edward H. (2013-05-01). "Two sexes, one genome: the evolutionary dynamics of intralocus sexual conflict". Ecology and Evolution. 3 (6): 1819–1834. doi:10.1002/ece3.540. ISSN 2045-7758.
  5. ^ Bateman, A J (1948-12). "Intra-sexual selection in Drosophila". Heredity. 2 (3): 349–368. doi:10.1038/hdy.1948.21. ISSN 0018-067X. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  6. ^ a b c d Rice, William R.; Holland, Brett (1997-07-14). "The enemies within: intergenomic conflict, interlocus contest evolution (ICE), and the intraspecific Red Queen". Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology. 41 (1): 1–10. doi:10.1007/s002650050357. ISSN 0340-5443.
  7. ^ Perry, Jennifer C.; Rowe, Locke (2015-06). "The Evolution of Sexually Antagonistic Phenotypes". Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Biology. 7 (6): a017558. doi:10.1101/cshperspect.a017558. ISSN 1943-0264. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  8. ^ Rice, William R. (1984-07). "Sex Chromosomes and the Evolution of Sexual Dimorphism". Evolution. 38 (4): 735. doi:10.2307/2408385. ISSN 0014-3820. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  9. ^ a b Andrés, J. A.; Morrow, E. H. (2003-02-10). "The origin of interlocus sexual conflict: is sex-linkage important?". Journal of Evolutionary Biology. 16 (2): 219–223. doi:10.1046/j.1420-9101.2003.00525.x. ISSN 1010-061X.
  10. ^ Holland, Brett; Rice, William R. (1998-02). "Perspective: Chase-Away Sexual Selection: Antagonistic Seduction Versus Resistance". Evolution. 52 (1): 1. doi:10.2307/2410914. ISSN 0014-3820. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  11. ^ "Sexual conflict and arms races between the sexes: a morphological adaptation for control of mating in a female insect". Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences. 261 (1360): 123–127. 1995-07-22. doi:10.1098/rspb.1995.0126. ISSN 0962-8452.
  12. ^ Van Valen, Leigh. "A new evolutionary law". Evolutionary Theory. 1: 1–30.
  13. ^ Andrés, J. A.; Morrow, E. H. (2003-02-10). "The origin of interlocus sexual conflict: is sex-linkage important?". Journal of Evolutionary Biology. 16 (2): 219–223. doi:10.1046/j.1420-9101.2003.00525.x. ISSN 1010-061X.
  14. ^ Bonduriansky, Russell; Chenoweth, Stephen F. (2009-05). "Intralocus sexual conflict". Trends in Ecology & Evolution. 24 (5): 280–288. doi:10.1016/j.tree.2008.12.005. ISSN 0169-5347. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  15. ^ Schenkel, Martijn A.; Pen, Ido; Beukeboom, Leo W.; Billeter, Jean‐Christophe (2018-12-11). "Making sense of intralocus and interlocus sexual conflict". Ecology and Evolution. doi:10.1002/ece3.4629. ISSN 2045-7758.
  16. ^ a b Stewart, Andrew D Morrow, Edward H Rice, William R. Assessing putative interlocus sexual conflict in Drosophila melanogaster using experimental evolution. The Royal Society. OCLC 678851562.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  17. ^ Hosken, D. J.; Uhia, E.; Ward, P. I. (2002-06). "The function of female accessory reproductive gland secretion and a cost to polyandry in the yellow dung fly". Physiological Entomology. 27 (2): 87–91. doi:10.1046/j.1365-3032.2002.00271.x. ISSN 0307-6962. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  18. ^ a b Martin, Oliver Y.; Hosken, David J.; Ward, Paul I. (2004-02-22). "Post–copulatory sexual selection and female fitness in Scathophaga stercoraria". Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences. 271 (1537): 353–359. doi:10.1098/rspb.2003.2588. ISSN 0962-8452. {{cite journal}}: line feed character in |title= at position 55 (help)
  19. ^ a b c Hollis, Brian; Koppik, Mareike; Wensing, Kristina U.; Ruhmann, Hanna; Genzoni, Eléonore; Erkosar, Berra; Kawecki, Tadeusz J.; Fricke, Claudia; Keller, Laurent (2019-04-08). "Sexual conflict drives male manipulation of female postmating responses in Drosophila melanogaster". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 116 (17): 8437–8444. doi:10.1073/pnas.1821386116. ISSN 0027-8424.
  20. ^ a b Aigaki, Toshiro; Fleischmann, Iréne; Chen, Pei-Shen; Kubli, Eric (1991-10). "Ectopic expression of sex peptide alters reproductive behavior of female D. melanogaster". Neuron. 7 (4): 557–563. doi:10.1016/0896-6273(91)90368-a. ISSN 0896-6273. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  21. ^ Avila, Frank W.; Wolfner, Mariana F. (2009-09-01). "Acp36DE is required for uterine conformational changes in mated Drosophila females". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 106 (37): 15796–15800. doi:10.1073/pnas.0904029106. ISSN 0027-8424.
  22. ^ Heifetz, Yael; Lung, Oliver; Frongillo, Edward A.; Wolfner, Mariana F. (2000-01). "The Drosophila seminal fluid protein Acp26Aa stimulates release of oocytes by the ovary". Current Biology. 10 (2): 99–102. doi:10.1016/s0960-9822(00)00288-8. ISSN 0960-9822. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  23. ^ Chapman, Tracey; Herndon, Laura A.; Heifetz, Yael; Partridge, Linda; Wolfner, Mariana F. (2001-08-22). "The Acp26Aa seminal fluid protein is a modulator of early egg hatchability in Drosophila melanogaster". Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences. 268 (1477): 1647–1654. doi:10.1098/rspb.2001.1684. ISSN 0962-8452. {{cite journal}}: line feed character in |title= at position 78 (help)
  24. ^ Chapman, Tracey; Liddle, Lindsay F.; Kalb, John M.; Wolfner, Mariana F.; Partridge, Linda (1995-01). "Cost of mating in Drosophila melanogaster females is mediated by male accessory gland products". Nature. 373 (6511): 241–244. doi:10.1038/373241a0. ISSN 0028-0836. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  25. ^ Haerty, Wilfried; Jagadeeshan, Santosh; Kulathinal, Rob J.; Wong, Alex; Ravi Ram, Kristipati; Sirot, Laura K.; Levesque, Lisa; Artieri, Carlo G.; Wolfner, Mariana F.; Civetta, Alberto; Singh, Rama S. (2007-11). "Evolution in the Fast Lane: Rapidly Evolving Sex-Related Genes in Drosophila". Genetics. 177 (3): 1321–1335. doi:10.1534/genetics.107.078865. ISSN 0016-6731. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  26. ^ Long, Tristan A.F; Montgomerie, Robert; Chippindale, Adam K (2006-01-04). "Quantifying the gender load: can population crosses reveal interlocus sexual conflict?". Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 361 (1466): 363–374. doi:10.1098/rstb.2005.1786. ISSN 0962-8436.

Article Evaluation[edit]


I have decided to evaluate the article for the Lee-Boot Effect. I noticed last Winter while conducting research on socio-sexual behaviour in mice that the Wikipedia page for the Lee-Boot effect was underdeveloped; this remains the case. As a result, I am interested in developing it for my Wikipedia assignment.

As this article is a stub, the Lead constitutes the vast majority of the article. The introductory sentence is clear, concise, and well-written. It summarizes the basis for the Lee-Boot effect without over-complicating the subject. From there, the Lead begins to deteriorate. Although the remaining sentences are important to the topic, they seem disjointed and do not flow together well. This makes the Lead awkward to read. For example, the pheromone believed to be predominantly involved in the Lee-Boot effect is mentioned in the second sentence, but is not elaborated on until the last sentence of the Lead. There are many links to other Wikipedia pages which is helpful, especially for readers who may not be familiar with reproductive responses in mice. However, the Lead include additional citations to support the information.

The article is extremely short and there is much that needs to be elaborated upon. There is a description of what the Lee-Boot effect is and the predominant species in which it occurs (mice), but the article does not discuss the mechanism by which it occurs, reasons why it occurs, and if it occurs in other species.This content could be included in additional sections in the article. The most recent scientific article referenced in the Wikipedia article is from six years ago. This may indicate that the content needs to be updated if there has been more recent literature published on the topic. All of the content that is included in the article is relevant to the topic and there is no information that is irrelevant.

The tone of the article is neutral. There are no instances where the article pushes a certain position on the readers or purposely excludes information from a particular position. As the article is very underdeveloped, all viewpoints regarding the Lee-Boot effect's mechanism, purpose, and consequences remain underrepresented. Additional research should be done to examine these aspects of the Lee-Boot effect in the literature and develop the article from there.

Although there are some references included in the article, citations are not included for all of the content in the Lead. It is vital that all information included in a Wikipedia article be supported by reliable sources and cited correctly. There are statements made in the article that are not referenced, making it questionable whether the information is reliable. For example, the article states: "The same response is invoked from isolated females when brought into contact with urine-soaked bedding from other females' cages." However, there is no citation to indicate where this information came from and if that source is reliable. The references that are included are correct and relevant and the links work. The article could be enhanced by examining the scientific literature for more recent articles about the Lee-Boot effect.

As the article stands, there is very little content on the page to organize. For this reason, the information is not broken into relevant sections. For the most part, the article is well-written. The information in the Lead is relevant to the subject and does not have any grammatical or spelling errors. However, the flow between sentences reads awkwardly, as if the information is not connected together. It would be effective to create more of a transition between the sentences and link them together as being related to each other.

There are no images included in this Wikipedia article.

There are no conversations in this article's talk page. This indicates that there have been very little changes made to the article and the article was not developed through the collaboration of multiple Wikipedians. The article is considered to be a stub. The banner above the article indicates that the article is lacking references and requires additional reliable sources to verify the legitimacy of the content. This article is a part of the Biology, Physiology, and Rodents Wikiprojects.

Overall, the article is off to a decent start. There are lots of relevant links to other Wikipedia pages to support the readers' understanding of the content. The citations that are included are correct and relevant, and the tone of the article is unbiased. However, this article exists as only stub and it needs substantial work to become a complete Wikipedia article. There is lots that can be done to improve this article. The first step would be to establish which sections need to be added to the article and begin researching additional information that can be included in these sections. For example, more information about how and why the Lee-Boot effect takes place should be added in new sections of the article. For example, it is important to provide an explanation of why the effect only manifests itself in the absence of male mice. Such explanations are not obvious to readers with limited knowledge of rodent reproduction. There are currently no images in the article. It would be effective to include images such as diagrams (such as a flow chart) of the effect's mechanism. JanuarytheCalico (talk) 03:00, 18 September 2019 (UTC)


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:JanuarytheCalico/sandbox&oldid=925064490"