Back

Cuticular hydrocarbon divergence in Drosophila melanogaster populations evolving under differential operational sex ratios

Dutta, R.; Chechi, T. S.; Yadav, A.; Prasad, N. G.

2020-07-13 evolutionary biology
10.1101/351718 bioRxiv
Show abstract

The ability of interlocus sexual conflict to facilitate reproductive isolation is widely anticipated. However, very few experimental evolutionary studies have convincingly demonstrated the evolution of reproductive isolation due to sexual conflict. Recently a study on replicate populations of Drosophila melanogaster under differential sexual conflict found that divergent mate preference evolved among replicate populations under high sexual conflict regime. The precopulatory isolating mechanism underlying such divergent mate preference could be sexual signals such as cuticular hydrocarbons since they evolve rapidly and are involved in D. melanogaster mate recognition. Using D. melanogaster replicates used in the previous study, we investigate whether cuticular hydrocarbon divergence bears signatures of sexually antagonistic coevolution that led to reproductive isolation among replicates of high sexual conflict regime. We found that D. melanogaster cuticular hydrocarbon profiles are sexually dimorphic. Although replicate populations under high sexual conflict displayed assortative mating, we found no significant differences in the cuticular hydrocarbon profile between the high and low sexual conflict regimes. Instead we find cuticular hydrocarbon divergence patterns to be suggestive of the Buridans Ass regime which is one of the six possible mechanisms to resolve sexual conflict. Sexual selection that co-vary between populations under high and low sexual conflict regimes may also have contributed to the evolution of cuticular hydrocarbons. This study indicates that population differentiation as a result of cuticular hydrocarbon divergence cannot be credited to sexual conflict despite high sexual conflict regime evolving divergent cuticular hydrocarbon profiles.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Ecology and Evolution
267 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
18.5%
2
BMC Ecology and Evolution
51 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.9%
3
Peer Community Journal
281 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
7.3%
4
Journal of Evolutionary Biology
110 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
6.7%
5
Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution
69 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.7%
6
Behavioral Ecology
36 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.3%
50% of probability mass above
7
Royal Society Open Science
214 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.0%
8
Evolution
225 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
4.0%
9
G3 Genes|Genomes|Genetics
351 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.2%
10
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 37%
3.2%
11
Molecular Ecology
336 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.2%
12
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 54%
1.7%
13
Molecular Ecology Resources
171 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.5%
14
Biological Journal of the Linnean Society
24 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.4%
15
Genome Biology and Evolution
338 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
16
Heredity
64 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.3%
17
Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology
39 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.1%
18
Journal of Experimental Zoology Part B: Molecular and Developmental Evolution
22 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.1%
19
Insect Molecular Biology
20 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.1%
20
Animal Behaviour
73 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.9%
21
G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics
252 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
22
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
393 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.9%
23
Journal of Experimental Biology
259 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
24
Molecular Biology and Evolution
542 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
25
G3
33 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.8%
26
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 65%
0.8%
27
BMC Genomics
406 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.6%