Back

Sex allocation, inbreeding, and measures of population differentiation in hermaphroditic metapopulations

Rouxc, C.; Mullon, C. D. L.; Neuenschwander, S.; Pannell, J.

2020-05-09 evolutionary biology
10.1101/2020.05.08.080929 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Selection in inbred populations is expected to favor female-biased sex ratios in dioecious populations as a result of local mate competition, a prediction that finds strong support in situations where females have control of the sex ratio. Local mate competition due to inbreeding should also promote female-biased sex allocation in hermaphrodites, with reduced emphasis on the production and dispersal of sperm or pollen relative to that of eggs, ovules or seeds. While inbreeding can be the direct result of the mating system in local populations, it can also be brought about by population turnover in metapopulations with frequent local extinction and recolonization. This effect of population turnover has previously been considered for species with separate sexes. Here, we use both formal analysis and individual-based simulations to explore the effect of population turnover on sex allocation in partially self-fertilizing hermaphroditic metapopulations. Using simulations, we also assess the extent to which different genetic measures of inbreeding and population differentiation predict the equilibrium sex allocation. We find that population turnover can select for strongly female-biased sex allocation in hermaphroditic metapopulations, particularly if amongdeme dispersal is low, even where local demes are fully outcrossing. In such situations, FST is a good predictor of the equilibrium sex allocation, and much better than the alternative differentiation measures GST and Josts D. Our study extends predictions for sex allocation in subdivided populations to hermaphroditic species, and draws attention in general to the power of Wrights hierarchical inbreeding statistics to predict the sex allocation in metapopulations at equilibrium.

Published in Evolution (predicted rank #4) · training set

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.