Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Speciation and evolutionary dynamics of asymmetric mating preference

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Researches on Population Ecology

Abstract

Asymmetric mating preferences occur in two closely related species, if females of one species are highly selective against males of the second, while females of the second show less selection against males of the first species. It has been suggested that such asymmetry is an indicator of common ancestry between the two species, but actual observations are contradictory and inconclusive. We developed a scenario of speciation history and asymmetric mating preference, incorporating invasion dynamicsvia frequency-dependent interspecific sexual competition. A newly isolated (derived) species may form at the periphery of the ancestral species’ distribution by invading a new range. Only a few closely related species would be expected in the new area, while many related species are expected to coexist with the ancestral species. In a peripherally derived species, female mating preferences should be relaxed through sexual character release, owing to a lack of sympatric species and a scarcity of intraspecific mating opportunities. Secondary contacts may then happen as: 1. repeated invasions, i.e. subsequent invasion by the ancestral species into the new range or, 2. backward invasions, i.e. derived species incursions into the ancestral range. Repeated invasions could lead to the coexistence of both the derived species and the newly invading ancestor. Backward invasions by the derived species can succeed only when the derived females develop a strict mating discrimination against the ancestral males. We then expect strong character displacement in the derived species. Thus, peripheral isolation and repeated invasions lead to the relaxed female mating preferences in the derived species and backward invasions lead to stronger female mating preferences in the derived species. This agrees withDrosophila data from Hawaii and the continents. Experimental data of theDrosophila arizonaemojavensis species cluster also support the hypothesis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson, R. F. V. (1977) Ethological isolation and competition of allospecies in a secondary contact.American Naturalist 111: 939–949.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barker, J. S. F. and W. T. Starmer (eds.) (1982)Ecological genetics and evolution: the cactus-yeast-Drosophila model system. Academic Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barton, N. H. and G. M. Hewitt (1989) Adaptation, speciation and hybrid zones.Nature 341: 497–503.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bateman, A. J. (1948) Intra-sexual selection inDrosophila.Heredity 2: 349–368.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bateson, P. (ed.) (1983)Mate choice. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brazner, J., V. Aberdeen and W. T. Starmer (1984) Host-plant shifts and adult survival in the cactus breedingDrosophila mojavensis.Ecological Entomology 9: 375–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, W. L. and E. O. Wilson (1956) Character displacement.Systematic Zoology 5: 49–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butlin, R. K. (1987a) Speciation by reinforcement.Trends in Ecology and Evolution 2: 8–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butlin, R. K. (1987b) Species, speciation, and reinforcement.American Naturalist 130: 461–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butlin, R. (1989) Reinforcement of premating isolation, pp. 158–179. In D. Otte and J. A. Endler (eds.)Speciation and its consequences. Sinauer, Sunderland, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carson, H. L. (1986) Sexual selection and speciation. pp. 391–409. In S. Karlin and E. Nevo (eds.)Evolutionary processes and theory. Academic Press, San Diego.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carson, H. L. (1990) Evolutionary process as studied in population genetics: clues from phylogeny.Oxford Surveys in Evolutionary Biology 7: 129–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colwell, R. K. (1985) Community biology and sexual selection: Lessons from hummingbird flower mites, pp. 406–424. In T. Case and J. M. Diamond (eds.)Ecological communities. Harper & Row, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colwell, R. K. (1986) Population structure and sexual selection for host fidelity in the speciation of hummingbird flower mites. pp. 475–493. In S. Karlin and E. Nevo (eds.)Evolutionary processes and theory. Academic Press, San Diego.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coyne, J. A. and H.A. Orr (1989) Patterns of speciation inDrosophila.Evolution 43: 362–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dobzhansky, T. (1940) Speciation as a stage of genetic divergence.American Naturalist 74: 312–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dobzhansky, T. (1951)Genetics and the origin of species, 3rd edn. Columbia University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eberhard, W. G. (1985)Sexual selection and animal genitalia. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fellows, D. P. and W. B. Heed (1972) Factors affecting host plant selection in desert-adapted cactiphilicDrosophila.Ecology 53: 850–858.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, R. A. (1930)The genetical theory of natural selection. Oxford University Press (Reprint: 1958, Dover, New York).

  • Gastil, R. G., R. P. Phillips and E. C. Allison (1975) Reconnaissance geology of the state of Baja California.The Geological Society of America, Inc. Memoir 140: 139–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giddings, L. V., K. Y. Kaneshiro and W. W. Anderson (eds.) (1989)Genetics, speciation and the founder principle. Oxford University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant, P. R. (1986)Ecology and evolution of Darwin’s finches. Princeton University Press, Princeton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grimaldi, D. A. (1987) Phylogenetics and taxonomy ofZygothrica (Diptera: Drosophilidae).Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 186: 103–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, R. G. (1990) Hybrid zones: windows on evolutionary process.Oxford Surveys in Evolutionary Biology 7: 69–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, P. H. and S. J. Arnold (1982) Female mate choice and runaway sexual selection.Nature 297: 533–534.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Heed, W. B. (1978) Ecology and genetics of Sonoran desertDrosophila. pp. 109–126. In P. F. Brussard (ed.)Ecological genetics: the interface Springer-Verlag, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoy, R. R., A. Hoikkala and K. Kaneshiro (1988) Hawaiian courtship songs: evolutionary innovation in communication signals ofDrosophila.Science 240: 217–219.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hutchinson, G. E. (1978)An introduction to population ecology. Yale University Press, New Haven.

    Google Scholar 

  • Imanishi, K. (1949)The logic of biological society. Mainichishinbun (Reprint: 1971, Shisakusha, Tokyo), (in Japanese)

  • Kaneshiro, K. Y. (1976) Ethological isolation and phylogeny in the plantibia subgroup of HawaiianDrosophila.Evolution 30: 740–745.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaneshiro, K. Y. (1983) Sexual selection and direction of evolution in the biosystematics of Hawaiian Drosophilidae.Annual Review of Entomology 28: 161–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaneshiro, K. Y. (1987a) Speciation via sexual selection versus adaptive evolution in HawaiianDrosophila.Insect Science and Application 8: 447–452.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaneshiro, K. Y. (1987b) The dynamics of sexual selection and its pleiotropic effects.Behavior Genetics 17: 559–569.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kaneshiro, K. Y. (1988) Speciation in the HawaiiwanDrosophila.BioScience 38: 258–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaneshiro, K. Y. (1989) The dynamics of sexual selection and founder effects in species formation, pp. 279–296. In L. V. Giddings, K. Y. Kaneshiro and W. W. Anderson (eds.)Genetics, speciation, and the founder principle. Oxford University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaneshiro, K. Y. and C. R. B. Boake (1987) Sexual selection and speciation: issues raised by HawaiianDrosophila.Trends in Ecology and Evolution 2: 207–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kani, T. (1944)Ecology of stream living insects. Kenkyusha, Tokyo. (in Japanese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Koepfer, H. R. (1987a) Selection for sexual isolation between geographic forms ofDrosophila mojavensis. I. Interactions between the selected forms.Evolution 41: 37–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koepfer, H. R. (1987b) Selection for sexual isolation between geographic forms ofDrosophila mojavensis. II. Effects of selection of mating preference and propensity.Evolution 41: 1409–1413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kubota, K. (1991) Natural hybridization betweenLeptocarabus (L.)procerulus andL. (L.)kumagaii (Coleoptera, Carabidae).Japanese Journal of Entomology 59: 323–329.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuno, E. (1992) Competitive exclusion through reproductive interference.Researches on Population Ecology 34: 275–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lack, D. (1961)Darwin’s finches, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lack, D. (1971)Ecological isolation in birds. Blackwell, Oxford, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambert, D. M. (1984) Species-mate recognition systems, phylogenies and asymmetrical evolution.Journal of theoretical Biology 109: 147–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lorenz, K. Z. (1981)The foundations of ethology. Simon and Schuster, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacArthur, R. H. and E. O. Wilson (1967)The theory of island biogeography. Princeton University Press, Princeton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mallet, J. and N. H. Barton (1989) Strong natural selection in a warning-color hybrid zone.Evolution 43: 421–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malogolowkin-Cohen, C., A. S. Simmons and H. Levene (1965) A study of sexual isolation between certain strains ofDrosophila paulistorum.Evolution 29: 368–369.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mangan, R. L. (1978) Comparative interactions among host plant specificDrosophila species. Ph. D. Thesis, University of Arizona, Tuscon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markow, T. A. (1981) Mating preferences are not predictive of the direction of evolution in experimental populations ofDrosophila.Science 213: 1405–1407.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mayr, E. (1963)Animal species and evolution. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mettler, L. E. (1963)Drosophila mojavensis baja, a new form in themulleri complex.Drosophila Information Service 38: 57–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montague, J. R. and K. Y. Kaneshiro (1982) Flower-breeding species of Hawaiian Drosophilids in an early stage of sympatry.Pacific Insects 24: 209–213.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ohta, A. T. (1978) Ethological isolation and phylogeny in the Grimshawi species complex of HawaiianDrosophila.Evolution 32: 485–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Otte, D. and J. A. Endler (eds.) (1989)Speciation and its consequences. Sinauer, Sunderland, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paterson, H. E. H. (1978) More evidence against speciation by reinforcement.South African Journal of Science 74: 369–371.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paterson, H.E. H. (1993)Evolution and the recognition concept of species: collected writings. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ribeiro, J. M. C. and A. Spielman (1986) The satyr effect: a model predicting parapatry and species extinction.American Naturalist 128: 513–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ringo, J. M. (1977) Why 300 species of HawaiianDrosophila? The sexual selection hypothesis.Evolution 31: 694–696.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ritchie, M. G., R. K. Butlin and G. M. Hewitt (1989) Assortative mating across a hybrid zone inChorthippusparallelus (Orthoptera: Acrididae).Journal of Evolutionary Biology 2: 339–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, B. W. and D. S. Wilson (1994) Character release and displacement in fishes: a neglected literature.American Naturalist 144: 596–627.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, B. W., D. S. Wilson, A. S. Margosian and P. T. Lotito (1993) Ecological and morphological differentiation of pumpkinseed sunfish in lakes without bluegill sunfish.Evolutionary Ecology 7: 451–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz, A., W. B. Heed and M. Wasserman (1990) Evolution of themojavensis cluster of cactophilicDrosophila with descriptions of two new species.Journal of Heredity 81: 30–42.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schluter, D. (1988) Character displacement and the adaptive divergence of finches on islands and continents.American Naturalist 131: 799–824.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slatkin, M. (1980) Ecological character displacement.Ecology 61: 163–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slobodkin, L.B. (1961)Growth and regulation of animal populations. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spencer, H. G., B. H. McArdle and D.M. Lambert (1986) A theoretical investigation of speciation by reinforcement.American Naturalist 128: 241–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Starmer, W. T. (1981) A comparison ofDrosophila habitats according to the physiological attributes of the associated yeast communities.Evolution 35: 38–52.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Starmer, W. T. and J. C. Fogleman (1986) Coadaptation ofDrosophila and yeasts in their natural habitat.Journal of Chemical Ecology 12: 1037–1055.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Templeton, A. R. (1979) Once again, why 300 species of HawaiianDrosophilal Evolution 33: 513–517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Templeton, A. R. (1981) Mechanisms of speciation-a population genetic approach.Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 12: 23–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thornhill, R. and J. Alcock (1983)The evolution of insect mating systems. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tilman, D. (1982)Resource competition and community structure. Princeton University Press, Princeton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tinbergen, N. (1951)The study of instinct. Oxford University Press, Cambridge, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wasserman, M. (1982) Evolution of therepleta group, pp. 61–139. In M. Ashburner, H. L. Carson, and J. N. Thompson, Jr. (eds.)The genetics and biology of Drosophila, Vol. 3b. Academic Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wasserman, M. and H. R. Koepfer (1977) Character displacement for sexual isolation betweenDrosophila mojavensis andDrosophila arizonensis.Evolution 31: 812–823.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wasserman, M. and H. R. Koepfer (1980) Does asymmetrical mating preference show the direction of evolution?Evolution 34: 1116–1124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watanabe, T. K. and M. Kawanishi (1979) Mating preference and the direction of evolution inDrosophila.Science 205: 906–907.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, D. S. (1989) The diversification of single gene pools by densityand frequency-dependent selection, pp. 366–385. In D. Otte and J. A. Endler (eds.)Speciation and its consequences. Sinauer, Sunderland, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoshimura, J. (1992) By-product runaway evolution by adaptive mate choice: a behavioural aspect of sexual selection.Evolutionary Ecology 6: 261–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoshimura, J. and C. W. Clark (1994) Population dynamics of sexual and resource competition.Theoretical Population Biology 45: 121–131.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zahavi, A. (1975) Mate selection — a selection for a handicap.Journal of theoretical Biology 53: 205–214.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zouros, E. and C. J. d’Entremont (1980) Sexual isolation among populations ofDrosophila mojavensis: response to pressure from a related species.Evolution 34: 421–430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. Jin Yoshimura

    Present address: Department of Systems Engineering, Shizuoka University, 3-5-1 Johoku, 432-8011, Hamamatsu, Japan

Authors and Affiliations

  1. NERC Centre for Population Biology, Imperial College at Silwood Park, SL5 7PY, Ascot, Berkshire, UK

    Jin Yoshimura & William T. Starmer

  2. Department of Environmental and Forest Biology, State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry, 13210, Syracuse, NY, USA

    Jin Yoshimura & William T. Starmer

  3. Department of Biology, Syracuse University, 13244, Syracuse, NY, USA

    William T. Starmer

Authors
  1. Jin Yoshimura
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. William T. Starmer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jin Yoshimura.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Yoshimura, J., Starmer, W.T. Speciation and evolutionary dynamics of asymmetric mating preference. Res Popul Ecol 39, 191–200 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02765265

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02765265

Key words

Search

Navigation