Within-group male relatedness reduces harm to females in Drosophila (original) (raw)

References

1. Bourke, A. F. G. Principles of Social Evolution (Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, 2011)
   Google Scholar
2. Parker, G. A. Sexual conflict over mating and fertilization: an overview. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 361, 235–259 (2006)
   CAS Google Scholar
3. Rankin, D. J. Kin selection and the evolution of sexual conflict. J. Evol. Biol. 24, 71–81 (2011)
   CAS PubMed Google Scholar
4. Wild, G., Pizzari, T. & West, S. A. Sexual conflict in viscous populations: the effect of the timing of dispersal. Theor. Popul. Biol. 80, 298–316 (2011)
   PubMed MATH Google Scholar
5. Pizzari, T. & Gardner, A. The sociobiology of sex: inclusive fitness consequences of inter-sexual interactions. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 367, 2314–2323 (2012)
   PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
6. Edward, D. A., Fricke, C., Gerrard, D. T. & Chapman, T. Quantifying the life-history response to male exposure in female Drosophila melanogaster. Evolution 65, 564–573 (2011)
   PubMed Google Scholar
7. Liu, H. & Kubli, E. Sex-peptide is the molecular basis of the sperm effect in Drosophila melanogaster. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 100, 9929–9933 (2003)
   ADS CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
8. Chapman, T. et al. The sex peptide of Drosophila melanogaster: female post-mating responses analyzed by using RNA interference. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 100, 9923–9928 (2003)
   ADS CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
9. Wigby, S. & Chapman, T. Sex peptide causes mating costs in female Drosophila melanogaster. Curr. Biol. 15, 316–321 (2005)
   CAS PubMed Google Scholar
10. Fricke, C., Bretman, A. & Chapman, T. Female nutritional status determines the magnitude and sign of responses to a male ejaculate signal in Drosophila melanogaster. J. Evol. Biol. 23, 157–165 (2010)
    CAS PubMed Google Scholar
11. Anxolabéhère, D. Heterosis overdominance and frequency-dependent selection in Drosophila melanogaster at the sepia locus. Evolution 30, 523–534 (1976)
    PubMed Google Scholar
12. Fu, W. & Noll, M. The Pax2 homolog sparkling is required for development of cone and pigment cells in the Drosophila eye. Genes Dev. 11, 2066–2078 (1997)
    CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
13. Partridge, L. & Fowler, K. Non-mating costs of exposure to males in female Drosophila melanogaster. J. Insect Physiol. 36, 419–425 (1990)
    Google Scholar
14. Tan, C. K. W. et al. Sex-specific responses to sexual familiarity, and the role of olfaction in Drosophila. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 280, 20131691 (2013)
    Google Scholar
15. Le Galliard, J. F. et al. Sex ratio bias, male aggression, and population collapse in lizards. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 102, 18231–18236 (2005)
    ADS CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
16. Rankin, D. J. & Kokko, H. Sex, death and tragedy. Trends Ecol. Evol. 21, 225–226 (2006)
    PubMed Google Scholar
17. Rankin, D. J., Dieckmann, U. & Kokko, H. Sexual conflict and the tragedy of the commons. Am. Nat. 177, 780–791 (2011)
    PubMed Google Scholar
18. Fedorka, K. M. & Zuk, M. Sexual conflict and female immune suppression in the cricket, Allonemobious socius. J. Evol. Biol. 18, 1515–1522 (2005)
    PubMed Google Scholar
19. McInnis, D. O., Schaffer, H. E. & Mettler, L. E. Field dispersal and population sizes of native Drosophila from North Carolina. Am. Nat. 119, 319–330 (1982)
    Google Scholar
20. Robinson, S. P., Kennington, W. J. & Simmons, L. W. Preference for related mates in the fruit fly, Drosophila melanogaster. Anim. Behav. 84, 1169–1176 (2012)
    Google Scholar
21. Hamilton, W. D. Altruism and related phenomena, mainly in social insects. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 3, 193–232 (1972)
    Google Scholar
22. Bourke, A. F. G. & Frank, N. R. Social Evolution in Ants (Princeton Univ. Press, 1995)
    Google Scholar
23. Packer, C. & Pusey, A. E. Cooperation and competition within coalitions of male lions: kin selection or game theory. Nature 296, 740–742 (1982)
    ADS Google Scholar
24. McDonald, D. B. & Potts, W. K. Cooperative display and relatedness among males in a lek-mating bird. Science 266, 1030–1032 (1994)
    ADS CAS PubMed Google Scholar
25. Petrie, M., Krupa, A. & Burke, T. Peacocks lek with relatives even in the absence of social and environmental cues. Nature 401, 155–157 (1999)
    ADS CAS Google Scholar
26. Krakauer, A. H. Kin selection and cooperative courtship in wild turkeys. Nature 434, 69–72 (2005)
    ADS CAS PubMed Google Scholar
27. Den Boer, S., Baer, B. & Boomsma, J. J. Seminal fluid mediates ejaculate competition in social insects. Science 327, 1506–1509 (2010)
    ADS CAS PubMed Google Scholar
28. Moore, A. J. & Pizzari, T. Quantitative genetic models of sexual conflict based on interacting phenotypes. Am. Nat. 165, S88–S97 (2005)
    PubMed Google Scholar
29. Eldakar, O. T., Dlugos, M., Pepper, J. W. & Wilson, D. S. Population structure mediates sexual conflict in water striders. Science 326, 816 (2009)
    ADS CAS PubMed Google Scholar
30. Buckling, A. & Brockhurst, M. A. Kin selection and the evolution of virulence. Heredity 100, 484–488 (2008)
    CAS PubMed Google Scholar
31. Clancy, D. J. & Kennington, J. A simple method to achieve consistent larval density in bottle cultures. Drosoph. Inf. Serv. 84, 168–169 (2001)
    Google Scholar
32. Quinn, G. P. & Keough, M. J. Experimental Design and Data Analysis for Biologists. (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2002)
    Google Scholar
33. Kleinbaum, D. G. & Klein, M. Survival analysis: A self-learning text. 3rd edn (Springer, 2012)
    MATH Google Scholar
34. Charlesworth, B. Selection in populations with overlapping generations. I. The use of Malthusian parameters in population genetics. Theor. Popul. Biol. 1, 352–370 (1970)
    MathSciNet CAS PubMed MATH Google Scholar
35. Prout, T. & McChesney, F. Competition among immatures affects their adult fertility: population-dynamics. Am. Nat. 126, 521–558 (1985)
    Google Scholar
36. McGraw, J. B. & Caswell, H. Estimation of individual fitness from life-history data. Am. Nat. 147, 47–64 (1996)
    Google Scholar
37. Bastock, M. & Manning, A. The courtship behaviour of Drosophila melanogaster. Behaviour 8, 85–111 (1955)
    Google Scholar
38. Chen, S., Lee, A. Y., Bowens, N. M., Huber, R. & Kravitz, E. A. Fighting fruit flies: A model system for the study of aggression. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 99, 5664–5668 (2002)
    ADS CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
39. Jacobs, M. E. Influence of light on mating of Drosophila melanogaster. Ecology 41, 182–188 (1960)
    Google Scholar
40. Dierick, H. A. A method for quantifying aggression in male Drosophila melanogaster. Nature Protocols 2, 2712–2718 (2007)
    CAS PubMed Google Scholar
41. Nilsen, S. P., Chan, Y.-B., Huber, R. & Kravitz, E. A. Gender-selective patterns of aggressive behaviour in Drosophila melanogaster. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 101, 12342–12347 (2004)
    ADS CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
42. McCullagh, P. & Nelder, J. A. Generalized Linear Models. 2nd edn (Chapman & Hall, 1989)
    MATH Google Scholar
43. Liggett, R. E. & Delwiche, J. F. The beta-binomial model: variability in overdispersion across methods and over time. J. Sens. Stud. 20, 48–61 (2005)
    Google Scholar

Download references