Anisogamy, sexual selection, and the evolution and maintenance of sex
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
In the present paper we distinguish between two aspects of sexual reproduction. Genetic recombination is a universal features of the sexual process. It is a primitive condition found in simple, single-celled organisms, as well as in higher plants and animals. Its function is primarily to repair genetic damage and eliminate deleterious mutations. Recombination also produces new variation, however, and this can provide the basis for adaptive evolutionary change in spatially and temporally variable environments.
The other feature usually associated with sexual reproduction, differentiated male and female roles, is a derived condition, largely restricted to complex, diploid, multicellular organisms. The evolution of anisogamous gametes (small, mobile male gametes containing only genetic material, and large, relatively immobile female gametes containing both genetic material and resources for the developing offspring) not only established the fundamental basis for maleness and femaleness, it also led to an asymmetry between the sexes in the allocation of resources to mating and offspring. Whereas females allocate their resources primarily to offspring, the existence of many male gametes for each female one results in sexual selection on males to allocate their resources to traits that enhance success in competition for fertilizations. A consequence of this reproductive competition, higher variance in male than female reproductive success, results in more intense selection on males.
The greater response of males to both stabilizing and directional selection constitutes an evolutionary advantage of males that partially compensates for the cost of producing them. The increased fitness contributed by sexual selection on males will complement the advantages of genetic recombination for DNA repair and elimination of deleterious mutations in any outcrossing breeding system in which males contribute only genetic material to their offspring. Higher plants and animals tend to maintain sexual reproduction in part because of the enhanced fitness of offspring resulting from sexual selection at the level of individual organisms, and in part because of the superiority of sexual populations in competition with asexual clones.
- Andersson, M. (1982a) Female choice sets for extreme tail length in a widowbird.Nature 299, 818–20.
- Andersson, M. (1982b) Sexual selection, natural selection and quality advertisement.Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 17, 375–93.
- Andersson, M. (1986) Evolution of condition-dependent sex ornaments and mating preferences: sexual selection based on viability differences.Evolution 40, 804–16.
- Bateman, A. J. (1948) Intra-sexual selection inDrosophila.Heredity 2, 349–68.
- Bateson, P. (ed.) (1983)Mate Choice, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
- Bell, G. (1978) The evolution of anisogamy.J. Theor. Biol. 73, 247–70.
- Bell, G. (1982)The Masterpiece of Nature: the Evolution and Genetics of Sexuality, University of California Press, Berkeley, California.
- Bernstein, H. (1977) Germ line recombination may be primarily a manifestation of DNA repair processes.J. Theor. Biol. 69, 371–80.
- Bernstein, H. (1983) Recombinational repair may be an important function of sexual reproduction.BioScience 33, 326–31.
- Bernstein, H., Byers, G. S. and Michod, R. E. (1981) Evolution of sexual reproduction: Importance of DNA repair, complementation and variation.Am. Nat. 117, 537–49.
- Bernstein, H., Byerly, H. C., Hopf, F. A. and Michod, R. E. (1984) Origin of sex.J. Theor. Biol. 110, 323–51.
- Bernstein, H., Byerly, H. C., Hopf, F. A. and Michod, R. E. (1985a) Genetic damage, mutation and the evolution of sex.Science 229, 1277–81.
- Bernstein, H., Byerly, H. C., Hopf, F. A. and Michod, R. E. (1985b) DNA repair and complementation: the major factors in the origin and maintenance of sex. InThe Origin and Evolution of Sex (H. O. Halverson, ed.) pp. 29–45. Alan R. Liss, Inc.
- Charlesworth, B. (1978) The population genetics of anisogamy.J. Theor. Biol. 73, 347–57.
- Clutton-Brock, T. H. (1982) The functions of antlers.Behaviour 79, 108–25.
- Cole, C. J. (1984) Unisexual lizards.Sci. Amer. 250, 94–100.
- Cox, P. and Sethian, J. (1984) Search, encounter rates and the evolution of anisogamy.Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 81, 6078–9.
- Cox, P. and Sethian, J. (1985) Gamete motion, search and the evolution of anisogamy, oogamy, and chemotaxis.Am. Nat. 125, 74–101.
- Darwin, C. (1859)On the Origin of Species. John Murray, London.
- Felsenstein, J. (1974) The evolutionary advantage of recombination.Genetics 78, 737–56.
- Fisher, R. A. (1930)The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection, 2nd edn. Dover, New York.
- Glesener, R. R. and Tilman, D. (1978) Sexuality and the components of environmental uncertainty: clues from geographic parthenogenesis in terrestrial animals.Am. Nat. 112, 659–73.
- Hamilton, W. D. and Zuk, M. (1982) Heritable true fitness and bright birds: a role for parasites?Science 218, 384–7.
- Heisler, I. L. (1984) A quantitative genetic model for the origin of mating preferences.Evolution 38, 1283–95.
- Hopf, F. A. and Hopf, F. W. (1985) The role of the Allee effect on species packing.Theor. Pop. Biol. 27, 27–50.
- Kirkpatrick, M. (1982) Sexual selection and the evolution of female choice.Evolution 36, 1–12.
- Kodric-Brown, A. (1985) Female preference and sexual selection for male coloration in the guppy (Poecilia reticulata).Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 17, 199–205.
- Kodric-Brown, A. and Brown, J. H. (1984) Truth in advertising: the kinds of traits favored by sexual selection.Am. Nat. 124, 309–23.
- Kodric-Brown, A. and Brown, J. H. (1985) Animal advertising: why the fittest are prettiest.The Sciences, Sept./Oct., 26–33.
- Lande, R. (1980) Sexual dimorphisms, sexual selection, and adaptation in polygenic characters.Evolution 34, 292–307.
- Le Boeuf, B. J. (1974) Male-male competition and reproductive success in elephant seals.Am. Zool. 14, 163–76.
- Leslie, J. F. and Vrijenhoek, R. C. (1980) Consideration of Muller's ratchet mechanism through studies of genetic linkage and genomic compatibilities in clonally reproducingPoeciliopsis.Evolution 34, 1105–15.
- Lloyd, D. G. (1979) Some reproductive factors affecting the selection of self-fertilization in plants.Am. Nat. 113, 67–79.
- Lynch, M. (1984) Destabilizing hybridization, general-purpose genotypes and geographic parthenogenesis.Quart. Rev. Biol. 59, 257–90.
- Manning, J. T. (1976) Gamete dimorphism and the cost of sexual reproduction. Are they separate phenomena?J. Theor. Biol. 55, 393–5.
- Maynard Smith, J. (1958)The Theory of Evolution, Penguin Books, Edinburgh.
- Maynard Smith, J. (1978)The Evolution of Sex, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
- Mulcahy, D. L., Curtis, P. A. and Snow, A. A. (1983) Pollen competition in a natural population. InHandbook of Experimental Pollination Biology (C. E. Jones Jr. and R. J. Little, eds) pp. 330–7. Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
- Muller, H. J. (1932) Some genetic aspects of sex.Am. Nat. 66, 118–38.
- Nur, N. and Hasson, O. (1984) Phenotypic plasticity and the handicap principle.J. Theor. Biol. 110, 275–97.
- O'Donald, P. (1980)Genetic Models of Sexual Selection, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
- Parker, G. A. (1978) Selection on non-random fusion of gametes during the evolution of anisogamy.J. Theor. Biol. 73, 1–28.
- Parker, G. A., Baker, R. R. and Smith, V. G. F. (1972) The origin and evolution of gamete dimorphism and the male-female phenomenon.J. Theor. Biol. 36, 529–53.
- Sakaluk, S. (1984) Male crickets feed females to ensure complete sperm transfer.Science 223, 609–10.
- Schultz, R. J. (1977) Evolution and ecology of unisexual fishes.Evol. Biol. 10, 277–333.
- Seger, J. and Trivers, R. (1986) Asymmetry in the evolution of female mating preferences.Nature 319, 771–3.
- Shields, W. M. (1982)Philopatry, Inbreeding, and the Evolution of Sex, State University of New York Press, Albany, New York.
- Stephenson, A. G. and Bertin, R. I. (1983) Male competition, female choice and sexual selection in plants. InPollination Biology (L. Real, ed.) pp. 109–49. Academic Press, New York.
- Thornhill, R. (1980) Competitive, charming males and choosy females: was Darwin correct?Fla. Entomol. 63, 5–30.
- Treisman, M. and Dawkins, R. (1976) The “cost of meiosis”: is there any?J. Theor. Biol. 63, 479–84.
- Trivers, R. L. (1972) Parental investment and sexual selection. InSexual Selection and the Descent of Man (B. Campbell, ed.) pp. 136–79. Aldine, Chicago.
- Trivers, R. L. (1976) Sexual selection and resource-accruing abilities inAnolis garmani.Evolution 30, 253–69.
- Weismann, A. (1889) The significance of sexual reproduction in the theory of natural selection. InEssays Upon Heredity and Kindred Biological Problems (August Weismann, E. B. Poulton, S. Schonland and A. E. Shipley, eds) pp. 251–332. Authorized translation, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
- Williams, G. C. (1975)Sex and Evolution. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.
- Williams, G. C. (1980) Kin selection and the paradox of sexuality. InSociobiology: Beyond Nature/Nurture? Reports, Definitions and Debate (G. W. Barlow and J. Silverman, eds) pp. 371–84. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado.
- Willson, M. F. (1983)Plant Reproductive Ecology. Wiley, New York.
- Zahavi, A. (1975) Mate selection — a selection for a handicap.J. Theor. Biol. 53, 205–14.
- Zahavi, A. (1977) The cost of honesty (further remarks on the handicap principle).J. Theor. Biol. 67, 603–5.
- Anisogamy, sexual selection, and the evolution and maintenance of sex
Volume 1, Issue 2 , pp 95-105
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Kluwer Academic Publishers
- Additional Links
- Evolution of sex
- sexual selection
- Industry Sectors