Sexual selection protects against extinction
Populations of the flour beetle Tribolium castaneum with histories of strong versus weak sexual selection purge mutation load and resist extinction differently. Mutational load minimized by sexual selection Sexual reproduction is more costly than the asexual kind because the genetic contribution of...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Nature (London) 2015-06, Vol.522 (7557), p.470-473 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 473 |
---|---|
container_issue | 7557 |
container_start_page | 470 |
container_title | Nature (London) |
container_volume | 522 |
creator | Lumley, Alyson J. Michalczyk, Łukasz Kitson, James J. N. Spurgin, Lewis G. Morrison, Catriona A. Godwin, Joanne L. Dickinson, Matthew E. Martin, Oliver Y. Emerson, Brent C. Chapman, Tracey Gage, Matthew J. G. |
description | Populations of the flour beetle
Tribolium castaneum
with histories of strong versus weak sexual selection purge mutation load and resist extinction differently.
Mutational load minimized by sexual selection
Sexual reproduction is more costly than the asexual kind because the genetic contribution of a given individual to the next generation is halved. A disadvantage of asexual reproduction is the accumulation of mutations, and it has been suggested that sexual selection, which acts when reproduction is achieved through competition and choice, might purge mutation. Matthew Gage and colleagues tested this theory in a study of populations of the flour beetle
Tribolium castaneum
raised for seven years under conditions of strong or weak sexual selection. Lineages from populations that had previously experienced strong sexual selection were resilient to extinction and maintained fitness, even with strong inbreeding, with some families continuing to survive after 20 generations of sibling–sibling mating. By contrast, lineages derived from populations that experienced weak or non-existent sexual selection showed rapid fitness declines under inbreeding, and all were extinct after the tenth generation.
Reproduction through sex carries substantial costs, mainly because only half of sexual adults produce offspring
1
. It has been theorized that these costs could be countered if sex allows sexual selection to clear the universal fitness constraint of mutation load
2
,
3
,
4
. Under sexual selection, competition between (usually) males and mate choice by (usually) females create important intraspecific filters for reproductive success, so that only a subset of males gains paternity. If reproductive success under sexual selection is dependent on individual condition, which is contingent to mutation load, then sexually selected filtering through ‘genic capture’
5
could offset the costs of sex because it provides genetic benefits to populations. Here we test this theory experimentally by comparing whether populations with histories of strong versus weak sexual selection purge mutation load and resist extinction differently. After evolving replicate populations of the flour beetle
Tribolium castaneum
for 6 to 7 years under conditions that differed solely in the strengths of sexual selection, we revealed mutation load using inbreeding. Lineages from populations that had previously experienced strong sexual selection were resilient to extinction and maintained fitness under in |
doi_str_mv | 10.1038/nature14419 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1691600342</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A463709073</galeid><sourcerecordid>A463709073</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c557t-393bf27526411493873577e5c65282a74762413e960424d29c8fe72c81f86aff3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpt0s1LHDEUAPAgFl1tT72XRS-WOjZfk4-jSD8EoVDrOcTsyxCZzaxJBrb_faNr624ZckjI--XxeHkIvSf4gmCmPkdbxgSEc6L30IxwKRoulNxHM4yparBi4hAd5fyAMW6J5AfokLZa1aOaofNbWI-2n2fowZUwxPkqDaUe89x2NsRc5rAuIT7H3qI33vYZ3r3sx-ju65dfV9-bmx_frq8ubxrXtrI0TLN7T2VLBSeEa6Yka6WE1omWKmplrZBywkALzClfUO2UB0mdIl4J6z07RmebvLWWxxFyMcuQHfS9jTCM2RChicCYcVrp6X_0YRhTrNU9K60x1upVdbYHE6IfSrLuKam55IJJrLFkVTUTqoMIyfZDBB_q9Y4_mfBuFR7NNrqYQHUtYBncZNaPOw-qKfULOjvmbK5vf-7aTxvr0pBzAm9WKSxt-m0INk_DYbaGo-oPL70a75ew-Gf_TkMF5xuQayh2kLaaOZHvD-HEvcQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1691990098</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Sexual selection protects against extinction</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals</source><source>Nature</source><creator>Lumley, Alyson J. ; Michalczyk, Łukasz ; Kitson, James J. N. ; Spurgin, Lewis G. ; Morrison, Catriona A. ; Godwin, Joanne L. ; Dickinson, Matthew E. ; Martin, Oliver Y. ; Emerson, Brent C. ; Chapman, Tracey ; Gage, Matthew J. G.</creator><creatorcontrib>Lumley, Alyson J. ; Michalczyk, Łukasz ; Kitson, James J. N. ; Spurgin, Lewis G. ; Morrison, Catriona A. ; Godwin, Joanne L. ; Dickinson, Matthew E. ; Martin, Oliver Y. ; Emerson, Brent C. ; Chapman, Tracey ; Gage, Matthew J. G.</creatorcontrib><description>Populations of the flour beetle
Tribolium castaneum
with histories of strong versus weak sexual selection purge mutation load and resist extinction differently.
Mutational load minimized by sexual selection
Sexual reproduction is more costly than the asexual kind because the genetic contribution of a given individual to the next generation is halved. A disadvantage of asexual reproduction is the accumulation of mutations, and it has been suggested that sexual selection, which acts when reproduction is achieved through competition and choice, might purge mutation. Matthew Gage and colleagues tested this theory in a study of populations of the flour beetle
Tribolium castaneum
raised for seven years under conditions of strong or weak sexual selection. Lineages from populations that had previously experienced strong sexual selection were resilient to extinction and maintained fitness, even with strong inbreeding, with some families continuing to survive after 20 generations of sibling–sibling mating. By contrast, lineages derived from populations that experienced weak or non-existent sexual selection showed rapid fitness declines under inbreeding, and all were extinct after the tenth generation.
Reproduction through sex carries substantial costs, mainly because only half of sexual adults produce offspring
1
. It has been theorized that these costs could be countered if sex allows sexual selection to clear the universal fitness constraint of mutation load
2
,
3
,
4
. Under sexual selection, competition between (usually) males and mate choice by (usually) females create important intraspecific filters for reproductive success, so that only a subset of males gains paternity. If reproductive success under sexual selection is dependent on individual condition, which is contingent to mutation load, then sexually selected filtering through ‘genic capture’
5
could offset the costs of sex because it provides genetic benefits to populations. Here we test this theory experimentally by comparing whether populations with histories of strong versus weak sexual selection purge mutation load and resist extinction differently. After evolving replicate populations of the flour beetle
Tribolium castaneum
for 6 to 7 years under conditions that differed solely in the strengths of sexual selection, we revealed mutation load using inbreeding. Lineages from populations that had previously experienced strong sexual selection were resilient to extinction and maintained fitness under inbreeding, with some families continuing to survive after 20 generations of sib × sib mating. By contrast, lineages derived from populations that experienced weak or non-existent sexual selection showed rapid fitness declines under inbreeding, and all were extinct after generation 10. Multiple mutations across the genome with individually small effects can be difficult to clear, yet sum to a significant fitness load; our findings reveal that sexual selection reduces this load, improving population viability in the face of genetic stress.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0028-0836</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1476-4687</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1038/nature14419</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25985178</identifier><identifier>CODEN: NATUAS</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: Nature Publishing Group UK</publisher><subject>631/181/2470 ; Animal reproduction ; Animals ; Biological Evolution ; Biological research ; Evolution ; Extinction ; Extinction (Biology) ; Extinction, Biological ; Female ; Generations ; Genetic Fitness - genetics ; Genetic Fitness - physiology ; Genomes ; Humanities and Social Sciences ; Inbreeding ; letter ; Male ; Mating Preference, Animal - physiology ; multidisciplinary ; Mutation ; Natural selection ; Population ; Prevention ; Reproduction ; Reproduction - genetics ; Science ; Selection, Genetic - genetics ; Selection, Genetic - physiology ; Sexual behavior ; Tribolium - genetics ; Tribolium - physiology</subject><ispartof>Nature (London), 2015-06, Vol.522 (7557), p.470-473</ispartof><rights>Springer Nature Limited 2015</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2015 Nature Publishing Group</rights><rights>Copyright Nature Publishing Group Jun 25, 2015</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c557t-393bf27526411493873577e5c65282a74762413e960424d29c8fe72c81f86aff3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c557t-393bf27526411493873577e5c65282a74762413e960424d29c8fe72c81f86aff3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1038/nature14419$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1038/nature14419$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902,41464,42533,51294</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25985178$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lumley, Alyson J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Michalczyk, Łukasz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kitson, James J. N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Spurgin, Lewis G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Morrison, Catriona A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Godwin, Joanne L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dickinson, Matthew E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martin, Oliver Y.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Emerson, Brent C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chapman, Tracey</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gage, Matthew J. G.</creatorcontrib><title>Sexual selection protects against extinction</title><title>Nature (London)</title><addtitle>Nature</addtitle><addtitle>Nature</addtitle><description>Populations of the flour beetle
Tribolium castaneum
with histories of strong versus weak sexual selection purge mutation load and resist extinction differently.
Mutational load minimized by sexual selection
Sexual reproduction is more costly than the asexual kind because the genetic contribution of a given individual to the next generation is halved. A disadvantage of asexual reproduction is the accumulation of mutations, and it has been suggested that sexual selection, which acts when reproduction is achieved through competition and choice, might purge mutation. Matthew Gage and colleagues tested this theory in a study of populations of the flour beetle
Tribolium castaneum
raised for seven years under conditions of strong or weak sexual selection. Lineages from populations that had previously experienced strong sexual selection were resilient to extinction and maintained fitness, even with strong inbreeding, with some families continuing to survive after 20 generations of sibling–sibling mating. By contrast, lineages derived from populations that experienced weak or non-existent sexual selection showed rapid fitness declines under inbreeding, and all were extinct after the tenth generation.
Reproduction through sex carries substantial costs, mainly because only half of sexual adults produce offspring
1
. It has been theorized that these costs could be countered if sex allows sexual selection to clear the universal fitness constraint of mutation load
2
,
3
,
4
. Under sexual selection, competition between (usually) males and mate choice by (usually) females create important intraspecific filters for reproductive success, so that only a subset of males gains paternity. If reproductive success under sexual selection is dependent on individual condition, which is contingent to mutation load, then sexually selected filtering through ‘genic capture’
5
could offset the costs of sex because it provides genetic benefits to populations. Here we test this theory experimentally by comparing whether populations with histories of strong versus weak sexual selection purge mutation load and resist extinction differently. After evolving replicate populations of the flour beetle
Tribolium castaneum
for 6 to 7 years under conditions that differed solely in the strengths of sexual selection, we revealed mutation load using inbreeding. Lineages from populations that had previously experienced strong sexual selection were resilient to extinction and maintained fitness under inbreeding, with some families continuing to survive after 20 generations of sib × sib mating. By contrast, lineages derived from populations that experienced weak or non-existent sexual selection showed rapid fitness declines under inbreeding, and all were extinct after generation 10. Multiple mutations across the genome with individually small effects can be difficult to clear, yet sum to a significant fitness load; our findings reveal that sexual selection reduces this load, improving population viability in the face of genetic stress.</description><subject>631/181/2470</subject><subject>Animal reproduction</subject><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Biological Evolution</subject><subject>Biological research</subject><subject>Evolution</subject><subject>Extinction</subject><subject>Extinction (Biology)</subject><subject>Extinction, Biological</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Generations</subject><subject>Genetic Fitness - genetics</subject><subject>Genetic Fitness - physiology</subject><subject>Genomes</subject><subject>Humanities and Social Sciences</subject><subject>Inbreeding</subject><subject>letter</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Mating Preference, Animal - physiology</subject><subject>multidisciplinary</subject><subject>Mutation</subject><subject>Natural selection</subject><subject>Population</subject><subject>Prevention</subject><subject>Reproduction</subject><subject>Reproduction - genetics</subject><subject>Science</subject><subject>Selection, Genetic - genetics</subject><subject>Selection, Genetic - physiology</subject><subject>Sexual behavior</subject><subject>Tribolium - genetics</subject><subject>Tribolium - physiology</subject><issn>0028-0836</issn><issn>1476-4687</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNpt0s1LHDEUAPAgFl1tT72XRS-WOjZfk4-jSD8EoVDrOcTsyxCZzaxJBrb_faNr624ZckjI--XxeHkIvSf4gmCmPkdbxgSEc6L30IxwKRoulNxHM4yparBi4hAd5fyAMW6J5AfokLZa1aOaofNbWI-2n2fowZUwxPkqDaUe89x2NsRc5rAuIT7H3qI33vYZ3r3sx-ju65dfV9-bmx_frq8ubxrXtrI0TLN7T2VLBSeEa6Yka6WE1omWKmplrZBywkALzClfUO2UB0mdIl4J6z07RmebvLWWxxFyMcuQHfS9jTCM2RChicCYcVrp6X_0YRhTrNU9K60x1upVdbYHE6IfSrLuKam55IJJrLFkVTUTqoMIyfZDBB_q9Y4_mfBuFR7NNrqYQHUtYBncZNaPOw-qKfULOjvmbK5vf-7aTxvr0pBzAm9WKSxt-m0INk_DYbaGo-oPL70a75ew-Gf_TkMF5xuQayh2kLaaOZHvD-HEvcQ</recordid><startdate>20150625</startdate><enddate>20150625</enddate><creator>Lumley, Alyson J.</creator><creator>Michalczyk, Łukasz</creator><creator>Kitson, James J. N.</creator><creator>Spurgin, Lewis G.</creator><creator>Morrison, Catriona A.</creator><creator>Godwin, Joanne L.</creator><creator>Dickinson, Matthew E.</creator><creator>Martin, Oliver Y.</creator><creator>Emerson, Brent C.</creator><creator>Chapman, Tracey</creator><creator>Gage, Matthew J. G.</creator><general>Nature Publishing Group UK</general><general>Nature Publishing Group</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>7QR</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7TO</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88A</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>R05</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>S0X</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20150625</creationdate><title>Sexual selection protects against extinction</title><author>Lumley, Alyson J. ; Michalczyk, Łukasz ; Kitson, James J. N. ; Spurgin, Lewis G. ; Morrison, Catriona A. ; Godwin, Joanne L. ; Dickinson, Matthew E. ; Martin, Oliver Y. ; Emerson, Brent C. ; Chapman, Tracey ; Gage, Matthew J. G.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c557t-393bf27526411493873577e5c65282a74762413e960424d29c8fe72c81f86aff3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>631/181/2470</topic><topic>Animal reproduction</topic><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Biological Evolution</topic><topic>Biological research</topic><topic>Evolution</topic><topic>Extinction</topic><topic>Extinction (Biology)</topic><topic>Extinction, Biological</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Generations</topic><topic>Genetic Fitness - genetics</topic><topic>Genetic Fitness - physiology</topic><topic>Genomes</topic><topic>Humanities and Social Sciences</topic><topic>Inbreeding</topic><topic>letter</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Mating Preference, Animal - physiology</topic><topic>multidisciplinary</topic><topic>Mutation</topic><topic>Natural selection</topic><topic>Population</topic><topic>Prevention</topic><topic>Reproduction</topic><topic>Reproduction - genetics</topic><topic>Science</topic><topic>Selection, Genetic - genetics</topic><topic>Selection, Genetic - physiology</topic><topic>Sexual behavior</topic><topic>Tribolium - genetics</topic><topic>Tribolium - physiology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lumley, Alyson J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Michalczyk, Łukasz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kitson, James J. N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Spurgin, Lewis G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Morrison, Catriona A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Godwin, Joanne L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dickinson, Matthew E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martin, Oliver Y.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Emerson, Brent C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chapman, Tracey</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gage, Matthew J. G.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Chemoreception Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Oncogenes and Growth Factors Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Biology Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>eLibrary</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Materials Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Psychology</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>University of Michigan</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Nature (London)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lumley, Alyson J.</au><au>Michalczyk, Łukasz</au><au>Kitson, James J. N.</au><au>Spurgin, Lewis G.</au><au>Morrison, Catriona A.</au><au>Godwin, Joanne L.</au><au>Dickinson, Matthew E.</au><au>Martin, Oliver Y.</au><au>Emerson, Brent C.</au><au>Chapman, Tracey</au><au>Gage, Matthew J. G.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Sexual selection protects against extinction</atitle><jtitle>Nature (London)</jtitle><stitle>Nature</stitle><addtitle>Nature</addtitle><date>2015-06-25</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>522</volume><issue>7557</issue><spage>470</spage><epage>473</epage><pages>470-473</pages><issn>0028-0836</issn><eissn>1476-4687</eissn><coden>NATUAS</coden><abstract>Populations of the flour beetle
Tribolium castaneum
with histories of strong versus weak sexual selection purge mutation load and resist extinction differently.
Mutational load minimized by sexual selection
Sexual reproduction is more costly than the asexual kind because the genetic contribution of a given individual to the next generation is halved. A disadvantage of asexual reproduction is the accumulation of mutations, and it has been suggested that sexual selection, which acts when reproduction is achieved through competition and choice, might purge mutation. Matthew Gage and colleagues tested this theory in a study of populations of the flour beetle
Tribolium castaneum
raised for seven years under conditions of strong or weak sexual selection. Lineages from populations that had previously experienced strong sexual selection were resilient to extinction and maintained fitness, even with strong inbreeding, with some families continuing to survive after 20 generations of sibling–sibling mating. By contrast, lineages derived from populations that experienced weak or non-existent sexual selection showed rapid fitness declines under inbreeding, and all were extinct after the tenth generation.
Reproduction through sex carries substantial costs, mainly because only half of sexual adults produce offspring
1
. It has been theorized that these costs could be countered if sex allows sexual selection to clear the universal fitness constraint of mutation load
2
,
3
,
4
. Under sexual selection, competition between (usually) males and mate choice by (usually) females create important intraspecific filters for reproductive success, so that only a subset of males gains paternity. If reproductive success under sexual selection is dependent on individual condition, which is contingent to mutation load, then sexually selected filtering through ‘genic capture’
5
could offset the costs of sex because it provides genetic benefits to populations. Here we test this theory experimentally by comparing whether populations with histories of strong versus weak sexual selection purge mutation load and resist extinction differently. After evolving replicate populations of the flour beetle
Tribolium castaneum
for 6 to 7 years under conditions that differed solely in the strengths of sexual selection, we revealed mutation load using inbreeding. Lineages from populations that had previously experienced strong sexual selection were resilient to extinction and maintained fitness under inbreeding, with some families continuing to survive after 20 generations of sib × sib mating. By contrast, lineages derived from populations that experienced weak or non-existent sexual selection showed rapid fitness declines under inbreeding, and all were extinct after generation 10. Multiple mutations across the genome with individually small effects can be difficult to clear, yet sum to a significant fitness load; our findings reveal that sexual selection reduces this load, improving population viability in the face of genetic stress.</abstract><cop>London</cop><pub>Nature Publishing Group UK</pub><pmid>25985178</pmid><doi>10.1038/nature14419</doi><tpages>4</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0028-0836 |
ispartof | Nature (London), 2015-06, Vol.522 (7557), p.470-473 |
issn | 0028-0836 1476-4687 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1691600342 |
source | MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals; Nature |
subjects | 631/181/2470 Animal reproduction Animals Biological Evolution Biological research Evolution Extinction Extinction (Biology) Extinction, Biological Female Generations Genetic Fitness - genetics Genetic Fitness - physiology Genomes Humanities and Social Sciences Inbreeding letter Male Mating Preference, Animal - physiology multidisciplinary Mutation Natural selection Population Prevention Reproduction Reproduction - genetics Science Selection, Genetic - genetics Selection, Genetic - physiology Sexual behavior Tribolium - genetics Tribolium - physiology |
title | Sexual selection protects against extinction |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-04T11%3A59%3A02IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Sexual%20selection%20protects%20against%20extinction&rft.jtitle=Nature%20(London)&rft.au=Lumley,%20Alyson%20J.&rft.date=2015-06-25&rft.volume=522&rft.issue=7557&rft.spage=470&rft.epage=473&rft.pages=470-473&rft.issn=0028-0836&rft.eissn=1476-4687&rft.coden=NATUAS&rft_id=info:doi/10.1038/nature14419&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA463709073%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1691990098&rft_id=info:pmid/25985178&rft_galeid=A463709073&rfr_iscdi=true |