Genetics and adaptation in structured populations: sex ratio evolution in Silene vulgaris

  • Matthew S. Olson
  • David E. McCauley
  • Douglas Taylor
Part of the Georgia Genetics Review III book series (GEGR, volume 3)


Theoretical models suggest that population structure can interact with frequency dependent selection to affect fitness in such a way that adaptation is dependent not only on the genotype of an individual and the genotypes with which it co-occurs within populations (demes), but also the distribution of genotypes among populations. A canonical example is the evolution of altruistic behavior, where the costs and benefits of cooperation depend on the local frequency of other altruists, and can vary from one population to another. Here we review research on sex ratio evolution that we have conducted over the past several years on the gynodioecious herb Silene vulgaris in which we combine studies of negative frequency dependent fitness on female phenotypes with studies of the population structure of cytoplasmic genes affecting sex expression. This is presented as a contrast to a hypothetical example of selection on similar genotypes and phenotypes, but in the absence of population structure. Sex ratio evolution in Silene vulgaris provides one of the clearest examples of how selection occurs at multiple levels and how population structure, per se, can influence adaptive evolution.

Key words

cytoplasmic male sterility gynodioecy mitochondrial DNA subjective fitness 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Ashman, T.-L., 1999. Determinants of sex allocation in a gynodioecious wild strawberry: implications for the evolution of dioecy and sexual dimorphism. J. Evol. Biol. 12: 648–661.Google Scholar
  2. Bierzychudek, P., 1981. Pollinator limitation of plant reproductive effort. Am. Nat. 117: 838–840.Google Scholar
  3. Charlesworth, D., 1981. A further study of the problem of the maintenance of females in gynodioecious species. Heredity 46: 27–39.Google Scholar
  4. Charlesworth, D. & V. Laporte, 1998. The male-sterility polymorphism of Silene vulgaris: analysis of genetic data from two populations and comparison with Thymus vulgaris. Genetics 150: 1267–1282.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Cosmides, L.M. & J. Tooby, 1981. Cytoplasmic inheritance and intragenomic conflict. J. Theor. Biol. 89: 83–129.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Couvet, D.O. Ronce, & C. Gliddon, 1998. The maintenance of nucleocytoplasmic polymorphism in a metapopulation: the case of gynodioecy. Am. Nat. 152: 59–70.Google Scholar
  7. Coyne, J.A., N.H. Barton & M. Turelli, 1997. Perspective: a critique of Sewall Wright’s shifting balance theory of evolution. Evolution 51: 643–671.Google Scholar
  8. Coyne, J.A., N.H. Barton & M. Turelli, 2000. Is Wright’s shifting balance process important in evolution? Evolution 54: 306–317.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. de Haan, A.A., H.P. Koelewijn, M.P.J. Hundscheid & J.M.M Van Damme, 1997. The dynamics of gynodioecy in Plantago lanceolata L. II. Mode of action and frequencies of restorer alleles. Genetics 147: 1317–1328.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Delannay, X., P.H. Gouyon & G. Valdeyron, 1981. Mathematical study of the evolution of gynodioecy with cytoplasmic inheritance under the effect of a nuclear restorer gene. Genetics 99: 169–181.Google Scholar
  11. Dulberger, R. & A. Horovitz, 1984. Gender polymorphism in flowers of Silene vulgaris (Moench) Garcke (Caryophyllaceae). Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 89: 101–117.Google Scholar
  12. Emery, S.N., 2001. Inbreeding depression and its consequences in Silene vulgaris. Masters Thesis, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.Google Scholar
  13. Fisher, R.A., 1958. The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection, 2nd revised edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  14. Frank, S.A., 1989. The evolutionary dynamics of cytoplasmic male sterility. Am. Nat. 133: 345–376.Google Scholar
  15. Frank, S.A. & C.M. Barr, 2001. Spatial dynamics of cytoplasmic male sterility, pp. 219–243 in Integrating Ecology and Evolution in a Spatial Context, edited by J. Silvertown & J. Antonovics. Blackwell Science, Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
  16. Galloway, L.F. & C.B. Fenster, 2000. Population differentiation in an annual legume: local adaptation. Evolution 54: 1173–1181.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Goodnight, C.J., J.M. Scwartz & L. Stevens, 1992. Contextual analysis of models of group selection, soft selection, hard selection, and the evolution of altruism. Am. Nat. 140: 743–761.Google Scholar
  18. Goodnight, C.J. & M.J. Wade, 2000. The ongoing synthesis: a reply to Coyne, Barton, and Turelli. Evolution 54: 317–324.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Gouyon, P.H. & D. Couvet, 1987, A conflict between two sexes, females and hermaphrodites, pp. 245–260 in The Evolution of Sex and its Consequences, edited by S.C. Stearns. Birkauser Verlag, Basel.Google Scholar
  20. Gouyon, P.-H., F. Vichot & J.M.M. Van Damme, 1991. Nuclear-cytoplasmic male sterility: single-point equilibria versus limit cycles. Am. Nat. 137: 198–514.Google Scholar
  21. Graff, A., 1999. Population sex structure and reproductive fitness in gynodioecious Sidalaceea malviflora malviflora (Malvaceae). Evolution 53: 1714–1722.Google Scholar
  22. Gregorius, H.-R. & M.D. Ross, 1984. Selection with genecytoplasm interactions. I. Maintenance of cytoplasm polymorphisms. Genetics 107: 165–178.Google Scholar
  23. Hatcher, M.J., 2000. Persistence of selfish genetic elements: population structure and conflict. Trends Ecol. Evol. 15: 271–277.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Hurst, L.D., A. Atlan & B.O. Bengtsson, 1996. Genetic conflicts. Q. Rev. Biol. 71: 317–364.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Jacobs, M.S. & M.J. Wade, 2003. A synthetic review of the theory of gynodioecy. Am. Nat. 161: 837–851.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Jolls, C.L., 1984. The maintenance of hermaphrodites and females in populations of Silene vulgaris (Moench) Garcke (Caryoplyllaceae). Am. J. Bot. 71: 80.Google Scholar
  27. Jolls, C.L. & T.C. Chenier, 1989. Gynodioecy in Silene vulgaris (Caryophyllaceae): progeny success, experimental design, and maternal effects. Am. J. Bot. 76: 1360–1367.Google Scholar
  28. Levings, C.S. III., 1993. Thoughts on cytoplasmic male sterility in cms-T maize. Plant Cell 5: 1285–1290.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Lewis, D., 1941. Male sterility in natural populations of hermaphroditic plants. New Phytol. 40: 56–63.Google Scholar
  30. Lloyd, D.G., 1974. Theoretical sex ratios of dioecious and gynodioecious angiosperms. Heredity 32: 11–31.Google Scholar
  31. McCauley, D.E., 1998. The genetic structure of a gynodioecious plant: nuclear and cytoplasmic genes. Evolution 52: 255–260.Google Scholar
  32. McCauley, D.E. & M.T. Brock, 1998. Frequency-dependent fitness in Silene vulgaris, a gynodioecious plant. Evolution 52: 30–36.Google Scholar
  33. McCauley, D.E., M.S. Olson, S.N. Emery & D.L. Taylor, 2000a. Sex ratio variation in a gynodioecious plant: spatial scale and fitness consequences. Am. Nat. 155: 814–819.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. McCauley, D.E., M.S. Olson & D.R. Taylor, 2000b. The influence of metapopulation structure on genotypic fitness in a gynodioecious plant. Evol. Ecol. 14: 181–194.Google Scholar
  35. McCauley, D.E. & D.R. Taylor, 1997. Local population structure and sex ratio: evolution in gynodioecious plants. Am. Nat. 150: 406–419.Google Scholar
  36. Olson, M.S. & J.A. Antonovics, 2000. Correlations between male and female reproduction in the near-dioecious herb Astilbe biternata. Am. J. Bot. 87: 837–844.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Olson, M.S. & D.E. McCauley, 2000. Linkage disequilibrium and phylogenetic congruence between chloroplast and mitochondrial haplotypes in Silene vulgaris. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 267: 1801–1808.Google Scholar
  38. Olson, M.S. & D.E. McCauley, 2002. Mitochondrial DNA diversity, population structure, and gender association in the gynodioecious plant Silene vulgaris. Evolution 56: 253–262.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Pannell, J., 1997. The maintenance of gynodioecy and andro-dioecy in a metapopulation. Evolution 51: 10–20.Google Scholar
  40. Petterson, M.W., 1992. Advantages of being a specialist female in nondioecious Silene vulgaris S.L. (Caryophyllaceae). Am. J. Bot. 79: 1389–1395.Google Scholar
  41. Ross, M.D. & H.-R. Gregorius, 1985. Selection with genecytoplasm interactions. II. Maintenance of gynodioecy. Genetics 109: 427–439.Google Scholar
  42. Saumitou-Laprade, P., J. Cuguen & P. Vernet, 1994. Cytoplasmic male sterility in plants: molecular evidence and the nucleocytoplasmic conflict. Trends Ecol. Evol. 9: 431–435.Google Scholar
  43. Schnable, P.S. & R.P. Wise, 1998. The molecular basis of cytoplasmic male sterility and fertility restoration. Trends Plant Sci. 3: 175–180.Google Scholar
  44. Slatkin, M., 1977. Gene flow and genetic drift in a species subject to frequent local extinctions. Theor. Popul. Biol. 12: 253–262.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Taylor, D.R., D. McCauley & S. Trimble, 1999. Colonization success of females and hermaphrodites in the gynodioecious plant, Silene vulgaris. Evolution 53: 745–751.Google Scholar
  46. Taylor, D.R., M.S. Olson & D.E. McCauley, 2001. A quantitative genetic analysis of nuclear-cytoplasmic male sterility in structured populations of Silene vulgaris. Genetics 158: 833–841.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Van Damme, J.M.M., 1983. Gynodioecy in Plantago lanceolata L. II. Inheritance of three male sterility types. Heredity 50: 253–273.Google Scholar
  48. Wade, M.J. & C.J. Goodnight, 1998. Perspective: The theories of Fisher and Wright in the context of metapopulations: when nature does many small experiments. Evolution 52: 1537–1553.Google Scholar
  49. Werren, J.H. & L.W. Beukeboom, 1998. Sex determination, sex ratios, and genetic conflict. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 29: 233–261.Google Scholar
  50. Wilson, D.S., 1979. Structured demes and trait-group variation. Am. Nat. 113: 606–610.Google Scholar
  51. Wilson, D.S., 1980. The Natural Selection of Populations and Communities. Benjamin/Cummings, Menlo Park, CA, USA.Google Scholar
  52. Wright, S., 1931. Evolution in Mendelian populations. Genetics 16: 97–159.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matthew S. Olson
    • 1
  • David E. McCauley
    • 2
  • Douglas Taylor
    • 3
  1. 1.Institute of Arctic Biology and Department of Biology and WildlifeUniversity of Alaska FairbanksFairbanksUSA
  2. 2.Department of Biological ScienceVanderbilt UniversityNashville
  3. 3.Department of BiologyUniversity of VirginiaCharlottesvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations