Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The origin of reproductive isolating mechanisms is an important event in the process of speciation: Evidences from Drosophila

  • Chapter
Nature at Work: Ongoing Saga of Evolution

Abstract

In the origin and maintenance of race and species, isolation is an indispensable factor and its role and importance have been recognized for a long time. Even Lamarck and Darwin pointed out that interbreeding of different populations may result in swampimg of the differences acquired during the process of evolutionary divergence. During the process of speciation the diverging populations must acquire some means of isolation so that the genes from one gene pool are prevented from dispersing freely into foreign gene pool. Reproductive isolating mechanisms prevent exchange of genes between Mendelian populations by genetically conditioned mechanisms which are intrinsic to the organisms themselves. Thus, the origin of reproductive isolating mechanisms is an important event in the process of cladogenesis (speciation).

Drosophila characterized by rich species diversity (over 1500 described species) has been utilized in genetical, behavioral and evolutionary studies since the beginning of the last century as it is very good material for such studies. Different types of reproductive isolating mechanisms have been studied in Drosophila such as gametic isolation, ethological (sexual or behavioral) isolation, hybrid inviability and hybrid sterility. Among these four types of reproductive isolating mechanisms, ethological isolation is widespread in the genus Drosophila. Various techniques have been used by different investigators to test the degree of ethological isolation. In such studies, both types of ethological isolation, interspecific as well as intraspecific have been tested. In intraspecific sexual isolation tests, wild type and mutant strains of the same species have been utilized. The pattern of isolation as well as the degree of isolation has often been used to discuss the phylogenetic relationship among the species and also to elucidate the direction of evolution among closely related species of different species groups. There are different types of stimuli involved in mating behavior of Drosophila which provide basis for ethological isolation. There are interesting cases reported by Indian workers regarding the pattern of ethological isolation and the direction of evolution. Mechanisms of origin of reproductive isolating mechanisms and also the models which have been proposed to predict the direction of evolution based on the mode of mating preference have been discussed while mentioning numerous examples of both kinds of incomplete sexual isolation, intra- and inter-specific. While considering different forms of post-zygotic reproductive isolation, hybrid sterility is the most common form and it is of special interest as its genetic basis may provide information about the mechanism of speciation.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Darwin CR (1859) On the Origin of Species by Means of natural selection or the Preservation of favored races in the struggle for life. J Murray, London

    Google Scholar 

  2. Dobzhansky T (1951) In: Genetics and the Origin of Species. 3rd edition, Columbia Univ Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  3. Mayr E (1963) In: Animal Species and Evolution. Belknap Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  4. Coyne JA, Orr HA (2004) In: Speciation. Sinauer Associates, Inc., Publishers, Sunderland, MA

    Google Scholar 

  5. Schluter D (2009) Evidence for Ecological Speciation and Its Alternative. Science 323: 737–741

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Wagner M (1889) In: Die Entstehung der Arten Durch Raumliche Sonderang. Beno Schwalbe, Basel

    Google Scholar 

  7. Jordan K (1905) Der Gegesatz zwischen geographischer und nichtgeographischer variation. Zeits Wiss Zool 83:151–210

    Google Scholar 

  8. Dobzhansky T (1970) In: The Genetics of the Evolutionary Process. Columbia University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  9. Mayr E (1970) In: Population, Species and Evolution. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  10. Strickberger MW (2000) In: Evolution. 3rd edition, Jones and Bartlett Publishers, Sudbury, MA

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hartle BK, Hallgrimsson B (2008) In: Strickberger’Evolution. 4th edition, Jones and Burtlett Publishers, Sudbury, MA

    Google Scholar 

  12. Patterson JT, Stone WS (1952) Evolution in the genus Drosophila. Macmillan Company, New York

    Google Scholar 

  13. Spieth HT, Ringo JM (1983) Mating behavior and sexual isolation in Drosophila. In: The Genetics and Biology of Drosophila. Ashburner M, Carson HL, Thompson JN (Eds.), Academic Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  14. Chatterjee S, Singh BN (1989) Sexual isolation in Drosphila. Ind Rev Life Sci 9:101–135

    Google Scholar 

  15. Singh BN (1997) Mode of mating preference and the direction of evolution in Drosophila. Ind J Exp Biol 35:111–119

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Singh BN (2007) Reproductive isolation in Drosophila. Proc Natl Seminar evolutionary biology and biotechnology, Kolkata. Zoological Survey of India 87-100

    Google Scholar 

  17. Zouros E (1989) Advances in genetics of reproductive isolation in Drosophila. Genome 31:211–220

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Singh BN (1994) Hybrid sterility and its genetic basis in Drosophila. Ind Rev Life Sci 14:3–20

    Google Scholar 

  19. Paterson HE (1980) A comment on mate recognition system. Evolution 34:330–331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Ewing AW (1969) The genetic basis of sound production in Drosophila pseusoobscura and D. persimilis. Anim Behav 17:555–560

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Elens AA, Wattiaux JM (1964) Direct observation of sexual isolation. Dros Inf Serv 39:118

    Google Scholar 

  22. Patterson JT (1947) The insemination reaction and its bearing on the problem of speciation in the mulleri subgroup. Univ Texas Publ 4720:44–47

    Google Scholar 

  23. Patterson JT, McDonald LW, Stone WS (1947) Sexual isolation between members of the virilis group of species. Univ Texas Publ 4720:7–31

    Google Scholar 

  24. Dobzhansky T (1947) Effectiveness of intraspecific and interspecific matings in Drosophila pseudoobscura and D. persimilis. Am Nat 81:66–71

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Miller DD (1950) Mating behavior of Drosophila affinis and D. algonquin. Evolution 4:123–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Sturtevant AH (1920) Genetic studies on Drosophila simulans I. introduction. Hybrids with D. melanogaster. Genetics 5:488–500

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Wu CI (1992) A note on Haldane’s rule: Hybrid inviability versus hybrid sterility. Evolution 46:1584–1587

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Haldane JBS (1922) Sex ratio and unisexual sterility in hybrid animals. J Genet 12: 101–109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. White MJD (1973) In: Animal Cytology and Evolution. 3rd edition, Cambridge University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  30. Bock IR (1984) Interspecific hybridization in the genus Drosophila. Evol Biol 18:41–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Bock IR (1978) The bipectinata complex: A study in interspecific hybridization in the genus Drosophila (Insecta: Diptera). Aust J Biol Sci 31:197–208

    Google Scholar 

  32. Dobzhansky T, Spassky B (1959) Drosophila paulistorum, a cluster of species in status nascendii. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 45:419–428

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Mishra PK, Singh BN (2005) Why hybrid males are sterile in Drosophila? Curr Sci 89:1813–1819

    Google Scholar 

  34. Kaneshiro KY (1976) Ethological isolation and phylogeny in the planitibia subgroup of Hawaiian Drosophila. Evolution 30:740–745

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Arita LH, Kaneshiro KY (1979) Ethological isolation between two stocks of Drosophila adiastola Hardy. Proc Hawaiian Ent Soc 23:31–34

    Google Scholar 

  36. Ahearn JN (1980) Evolution of behavioral reproductive isolation in a laboratory stock of Drosophila silvestris. Experientia 36:63–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Dwivedi YN, Singh BN, Gupta JP (1982) One-sided sexual isolation between Drosophila takahashii and D. pseudotakahashii. Experientia 38:318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Ramachandra NB, Ranganath HA (1987) Mating preference between Drosophila nasuta nasuta and D. n. albomicans. Ind J Exp Biol 25:55–57

    Google Scholar 

  39. Ramachandra NB, Ranganath HA (1994) Pattern of sexual isolation between parental races (Drosophila nasuta nasuta and D. n. albomicans) and the newly evolved races (Cytorace I and II). Ind J Exp Biol 32:98–102

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Powell JR (1978) The founder-flush speciation theory: An experimental approach. Evolution 32:464–474

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Mayr E (1942) In: Systematics and the Origin of Species. Columbia University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  42. Carson HL (1971) Speciation and the founder principle. Stadler Genet Symp 3:51–70

    Google Scholar 

  43. Kaneshiro KY (1971) Sexual isolation, speciation and the direction of evolution. Evolution 980(34):437–444

    Google Scholar 

  44. Kaneshiro KY. Sexual isolation, and the direction of evolution in the biosystematics of Hawaiian Drosophilidae. Ann Rev Entomol 28:161–178

    Google Scholar 

  45. Giddings LV, Templeton AR (1983) Behavioral phylogenies and the direction of evolution. Science 220:372–378

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Watanabe TK, Kawanishi M (1979) Mating preference and the direction of evolution in Drosophila. Science 205:906–907

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Patterson JT, Stone WS (1949) The relationship of novamexicana to the other members of the virilis group. Univ Texas Publ 4920:7–17

    Google Scholar 

  48. Ayala FJ, Tracey ML, Barr LG, Ehrenfield JG (1974) Genetic and reproductive differentiation of the subspecies, Drosophila equinoxialis caribbensis. Evolution 28:24–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Singh BN, Dwivedi YN, Gupta JP (1981) Sexual isolation among three species of the Drosophila bipectinata species complex. Ind J Exp Biol, 19:898–900

    Google Scholar 

  50. Singh BN, Chatterjee S (1985) Symmetrical and asymmetrical sexual isolation among laboratory strains of Drosophila ananassae. Can J Genet Cytol 27:405–409

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Markow TA (1981) Mating preferences are not predictive of the direction of evolution in experimental populations of Drosophila. Science 213:1405–1407

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Ehrman L, Wasserman M (1987) The significance of asymmetrical sexual isolation. Evol Biol 21:1–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Sawamura K (1999) The origin of reproductive isolation: Biological mechanisms of genetic incompatibility. In: The Biology of Biodiversity. Kato M (Ed.), Springer-Verlag, Tokyo

    Google Scholar 

  55. Muller HJ (1942) Isolating mechanisms, evolution and temperature. Biol Symp 6:71–125

    Google Scholar 

  56. Carson HL (1975) Genetics of speciation. Am Nat 109:83–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Dobzhansky T (1940) Speciation as a stage in evolutionary divergence. Am Nat74: 312–321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Ehrman L (1965) Direct observation of sexual isolation between allopatric and between sympatric strains of different Drosophila paulistorum races. Evolution 19:459–464

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Wasserman M, Koepfer HR (1977) Character displacement for sexual isolation between Drosophila mojavensis and D. arizonensis. Evolution 31:812–823

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Zouros E, D’Entremont CJ (1980) Sexual isolation among populations of Drosophila mojavensis: response to pressure from a related species. Evolution 34:421–430

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Crossley S (1974) Changes in mating behavior produced by selection for ethological isolation between ebony and vestigial mutants of Drosophila melanogaster. Evolution 28:631–647

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Carracedo MC, Casares P, Sanmiguel E (1987) Sexual isolation between Drosophila melanogaster females and D. simulans males II influence of female receptivity on hybridization. Genome 29:334–339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Meigen JW (1830) Systematische Beschreibung der bekannten europaischen zweiflügeligen insekten. Sechster Theil Schulz, Hamm

    Google Scholar 

  64. Carpenter FW (1905) The reaction of the pomace fly (Drosophila ampelophila) to light, gravity and mechanical stimulation. Am Nat 39:157–171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Castle WE (1906) Inbreeding, crossbreeding and sterility in Drosophila. Science 23:153

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Morgan TH (1911) Random segregation versus coupling in Mendelian inheritance. Science 34:384

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. Sturtevant AH (1915) Experiments on sex recognition and the problem of sexual selection in Drosophila. J Anim Behav 5:351–366

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Parsons PA (1973) Behavioral and ecological genetics: A study in Drosophila. Clarendon Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  69. Stauffer RC (1975) Charles Darwin’s natural selection, being the second part of his big species book written from 1856 to 1858. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  70. Dobzhansky T (1973) Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution. Am Biol Teach 35:125–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Genetics Laboratory, Department of Zoology, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, 221005, India

    B. N. Singh

Authors
  1. B. N. Singh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. CRDT, IIT, Delhi, India

    Vinod P. Sharma

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 The National Academy of Sciences, India

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Singh, B.N. (2010). The origin of reproductive isolating mechanisms is an important event in the process of speciation: Evidences from Drosophila . In: Sharma, V.P. (eds) Nature at Work: Ongoing Saga of Evolution. Springer, New Delhi. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-8489-992-4_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation