Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Arrest of sex-specific adaptation during the evolution of sexual dimorphism in Drosophila

Nature Ecology & Evolution volume 2, pages 1507–1513 (2018)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Sexually antagonistic selection arises when a trait expressed in both sexes (a shared trait) is selected towards different, sex-specific optima. Sex-discordant selection causes different alleles to be favoured in each sex (intralocus sexual conflict). A key parameter responsible for generating this conflict is the intersexual genetic correlation (rMF), which determines the degree to which heritable genetic variation for the shared trait produces a similar phenotype in both sexes. A strong, positive rMF interferes with adaptation when there is sex-discordant selection. In principle, the rMF can evolve in response to sex-discordant selection: the faster it declines, the faster the resolution of intralocus sexual conflict. Here, we use Drosophila melanogaster to quantify the time scale over which a strong, positive rMF impedes a response to sex-discordant selection for a canonical quantitative trait (body size) with an exceptionally long (250 generations) selection experiment for a complex multicellular organism. We found that, compared with rapid and substantial evolution under sex-concordant selection, a high rMF arrested sex-specific adaptation for 100 generations in females and a minimum of 250 generations in males. Our study demonstrates that a high rMF can lead to a protracted period of adaptive stalemate during the evolution of sexual dimorphism.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Male and female body size over time.
Fig. 2: Sexual dimorphism over time.
Fig. 3: Body size change in response to long-term selection.
Fig. 4: Changes in male and female body size.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Darwin, C. The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex (John Murray, London, 1888).

  2. Lande, R. Sexual dimorphism, sexual selection, and adaptation in polygenic characters. Evolution 34, 292–305 (1980).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Arnqvist, G. & Rowe, L. Sexual Conflict (Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, 2013).

  4. Rice, W. R. Sex chromosomes and the evolution of sexual dimorphism. Evolution 38, 735–742 (1984).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Rice, W. R. Sexually antagonistic genes: experimental evidence. Science 256, 1436–1439 (1992).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Falconer, D. S., Mackay, T. F. & Frankham, R. Introduction to quantitative genetics (4th edn). Trends Genet. 12, 280 (1996).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Lynch, M. & Walsh, B. Genetics and Analysis of Quantitative Traits (Sinauer, Sunderland, 1998).

  8. Bonduriansky, R. & Chenoweth, S. F. Intralocus sexual conflict. Trends Ecol. Evol. 24, 280–288 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Rice, W. R. & Chippindale, A. K. Intersexual ontogenetic conflict. J. Evol. Biol. 14, 685–693 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Poissant, J., Wilson, A. J. & Coltman, D. W. Sex‐specific genetic variance and the evolution of sexual dimorphism: a systematic review of cross‐sex genetic correlations. Evolution 64, 97–107 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Chippindale, A. K., Gibson, J. R. & Rice, W. R. Negative genetic correlation for adult fitness between sexes reveals ontogenetic conflict in Drosophila. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 98, 1671–1675 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Foerster, K. et al. Sexually antagonistic genetic variation for fitness in red deer. Nature 447, 1107–1110 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Brommer, J. E., Kirkpatrick, M., Qvarnström, A. & Gustafsson, L. The intersexual genetic correlation for lifetime fitness in the wild and its implications for sexual selection. PLoS ONE 2, e744 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Stewart, A. D., Pischedda, A. & Rice, W. R. Resolving intralocus sexual conflict: genetic mechanisms and time frame. J. Hered. 101, S94–S99 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Mank, J. E. Population genetics of sexual conflict in the genomic era. Nat. Rev. Genet. 18, 721–730 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Delph, L. F., Steven, J. C., Anderson, I. A., Herlihy, C. R. & Brodie, E. D. III Elimination of a genetic correlation between the sexes via artificial correlational selection. Evolution 65, 2872–2880 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Bonduriansky, R. & Rowe, L. Intralocus sexual conflict and the genetic architecture of sexually dimorphic traits in Prochyliza xanthostoma (Diptera: Piophilidae). Evolution 59, 1965–1975 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Griffin, R. M., Dean, R., Grace, J. L., Ryden, P. & Friberg, U. The shared genome is a pervasive constraint on the evolution of sex-biased gene expression. Mol. Biol. Evol. 30, 2168–2176 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Dean, R. & Mank, J. E. Tissue specificity and sex-specific regulatory variation permit the evolution of sex-biased gene expression. Am. Nat. 188, E74–E84 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Bird, M. A. & Schaffer, H. E. A study of the genetic basis of the sexual dimorphism for wing length in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 72, 475–487 (1972).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Allen, H. L. et al. Hundreds of variants clustered in genomic loci and biological pathways affect human height. Nature 467, 832–838 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Wood, A. R. et al. Defining the role of common variation in the genomic and biological architecture of adult human height. Nat. Genet. 46, 1173–1186 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Fisher, R. A. XV.—The correlation between relatives on the supposition of Mendelian inheritance. Earth Environ. Sci. Trans. R. Soc. Edinb. 52, 399–433 (1919).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Turner, T. L., Stewart, A. D., Fields, A. T., Rice, W. R. & Tarone, A. M. Population-based resequencing of experimentally evolved populations reveals the genetic basis of body size variation in Drosophila melanogaster. PLoS Genet. 7, e1001336 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Cowley, D. E., Atchley, W. R. & Rutledge, J. J. Quantitative genetics of Drosophila melanogaster. I. Sexual dimorphism in genetic parameters for wing traits. Genetics 114, 549–566 (1986).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Cowley, D. E. & Atchley, W. R. Quantitative genetics of Drosophila melanogaster. II. Heritabilities and genetic correlations between sexes for head and thorax traits. Genetics 119, 421–433 (1988).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Reeve, J. P. & Fairbairn, D. J. Sexual size dimorphism as a correlated response to selection on body size: an empirical test of the quantitative genetic model. Evolution 50, 1927–1938 (1996).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Peters, R. H. The Ecological Implications of Body Size (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1986).

  29. Lefranc, A. & Bundgaard, J. The influence of male and female body size on copulation duration and fecundity in Drosophila melanogaster. Hereditas 132, 243–247 (2000).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Long, T. A. F., Pischedda, A., Stewart, A. D. & Rice, W. R. A cost of sexual attractiveness to high-fitness females. PLoS Biol. 7, e1000254 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Friberg, U. & Arnqvist, G. Fitness effects of female mate choice: preferred males are detrimental for Drosophila melanogaster females. J. Evol. Biol. 16, 797–811 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Dow, M. A. & von Schilcher, F. Aggression and mating success in Drosophila melanogaster. Nature 254, 511–512 (1975).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Ashburner, M. Drosophila. A Laboratory Handbook (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, 1989).

  34. Clutton-Brock, T. Sexual selection in males and females. Science 318, 1882–1885 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Kudo, A., Takamori, H., Watabe, H., Ishikawa, Y. & Matsuo, T. Variation in morphological and behavioraltraits among isofemale strains of Drosophila prolongata (Diptera: Drosophilidae). Èntomol. Sci 18, 221–229 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Setoguchi, S. et al. Sexual dimorphism and courtship behavior in Drosophila prolongata. J. Ethol. 32, 91–102 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Mathews, K. W., Cavegn, M. & Zwicky, M. Sexual dimorphism of body size is controlled by dosage of the X-chromosomal gene Myc and by the sex-determining gene tra in Drosophila. Genetics 205, 1215–1228 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Rideout, E. J., Narsaiya, M. S. & Grewal, S. S. The sex determination gene transformer regulates male–female differences in Drosophila body size. PLoS Genet. 11, e1005683 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Sawala, A. & Gould, A. P. The sex of specific neurons controls female body growth in Drosophila. PLoS Biol. 15, e2002252 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Ranz, J. M., Castillo-Davis, C. I., Meiklejohn, C. D. & Hartl, D. L. Sex-dependent gene expression and evolution of the Drosophila transcriptome. Science 300, 1742–1745 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Ayroles, J. F. et al. Systems genetics of complex traits in Drosophila melanogaster. Nat. Genet. 41, 299–307 (2009).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Mank, J. E. The transcriptional architecture of phenotypic dimorphism. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 1, 0006 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Robertson, F. W. & Reeve, E. Studies in quantitative inheritance. J. Genet. 50, 414–448 (1952).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Rice, W. R. et al. Inter-locus antagonistic coevolution as an engine of speciation: assessment with hemiclonal analysis. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 102, 6527–6534 (2005).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Kuijper, B. & Morrow, E. H. Direct observation of female mating frequency using time-lapse photography. Fly 3, 118–120 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Morrow, E. H., Stewart, A. D. & Rice, W. R. Patterns of sperm precedence are not affected by female mating history in Drosophila melanogaster. Evolution 59, 2608–2615 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Funding during the early part of this study was provided by the NSF (DEB-0128780 and DEB-0410112) and NIH (1R01HD057974-01). Canisius College provided funding during the later parts of the study. We thank A. Pischedda, P. Miller and numerous undergraduate researchers at UCSB and Canisius College for assistance with the body size assays, and U. Frieberg and A. Pischedda for comments on earlier drafts of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biology, Canisius College, Buffalo, NY, USA

    Andrew D. Stewart

  2. Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Marine Biology, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA, USA

    Andrew D. Stewart & William R. Rice

Authors
  1. Andrew D. Stewart
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. William R. Rice
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

The idea for this study originated from discussions between A.D.S. and W.R.R. A.D.S conducted the experiments. A.D.S. and W.R.R. conducted the data analyses and drafted the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrew D. Stewart.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Integrated supplementary information

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Stewart, A.D., Rice, W.R. Arrest of sex-specific adaptation during the evolution of sexual dimorphism in Drosophila. Nat Ecol Evol 2, 1507–1513 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-018-0613-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-018-0613-4

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing