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.

  • Review Article
  • Published:

The roles of sexual selection and sexual conflict in shaping patterns of genome and transcriptome variation

Nature Ecology & Evolution volume 7, pages 981–993 (2023)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Sexual dimorphism is one of the most prevalent, and often the most extreme, examples of phenotypic variation within species, and arises primarily from genomic variation that is shared between females and males. Many sexual dimorphisms arise through sex differences in gene expression, and sex-biased expression is one way that a single, shared genome can generate multiple, distinct phenotypes. Although many sexual dimorphisms are expected to result from sexual selection, and many studies have invoked the possible role of sexual selection to explain sex-specific traits, the role of sexual selection in the evolution of sexually dimorphic gene expression remains difficult to differentiate from other forms of sex-specific selection. In this Review, we propose a holistic framework for the study of sex-specific selection and transcriptome evolution. We advocate for a comparative approach, across tissues, developmental stages and species, which incorporates an understanding of the molecular mechanisms, including genomic variation and structure, governing gene expression. Such an approach is expected to yield substantial insights into the evolution of genetic variation and have important applications in a variety of fields, including ecology, evolution and behaviour.

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

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

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

Fig. 1: The relationship between intralocus sexual conflict, sex-specific selection landscapes, sexual dimorphism and some predictions for how variation in male–female gene expression might be impacted by ongoing intralocus conflict.
Fig. 2: A schematic of mechanisms that facilitate genetic variation, transcriptional variation and the ability to respond to selection.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Darwin, C. The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex (Murray, 1871).

  2. Padian, K. Origins of Darwin’s evolution: solving the species puzzle through time and place. By J. David Archibald. Syst. Biol. 67, 741–742 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Trail, P. W. Why should lek-breeders be monomorphic? Evolution 44, 1837–1852 (1990).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Andersson, M. Female choice selects for extreme tail length in a widowbird. Nature 299, 818–820 (1982).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Madden, J. R. Male spotted bowerbirds preferentially choose, arrange and proffer objects that are good predictors of mating success. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 53, 263–268 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Toth, C. A. & Parsons, S. Is lek breeding rare in bats? J. Zool. 291, 3–11 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hare, R. M. & Simmons, L. W. Sexual selection and its evolutionary consequences in female animals. Biol. Rev. 94, 929–956 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. West-Eberhard, M. J. Sexual selection, social competition, and evolution. Proc. Am. Philos. Soc. 123, 222–234 (1979).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Parker, G. A. in Sexual Selection and Reproductive Competition in Insects (eds. Blum, M. S. & Blum, N. A.) 166 (Academic Press, 1979).

  11. Shine, R. Ecological causes for the evolution of sexual dimorphism: a review of the evidence. Q. Rev. Biol. 64, 419–461 (1989).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Gavrilets, S., Arnqvist, G. & Friberg, U. The evolution of female mate choice by sexual conflict. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 268, 531–539 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Gavrilets, S. & Waxman, D. Sympatric speciation by sexual conflict. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 99, 10533–10538 (2002).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Li Richter, X.-Y. & Hollis, B. Softness of selection and mating system interact to shape trait evolution under sexual conflict. Evolution 75, 2335–2347 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Hedrick, A. V. & Temeles, E. J. The evolution of sexual dimorphism in animals: hypotheses and tests. Trends Ecol. Evol. 4, 136–138 (1989).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Paczolt, K. A. & Jones, A. G. Post-copulatory sexual selection and sexual conflict in the evolution of male pregnancy. Nature 464, 401–U94 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Punzalan, D. & Hosken, D. J. Sexual dimorphism: why the sexes are (and are not) different. Curr. Biol. 20, R972–R973 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lande, R. Models of speciation by sexual selection on polygenic traits. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 78, 3721–3725 (1981).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Kirkpatrick, M. & Ravigné, V. Speciation by natural and sexual selection: models and experiments. Am. Nat. 159, S22–S35 (2002).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Mendelson, T. C. & Safran, R. J. Speciation by sexual selection: 20 years of progress. Trends Ecol. Evol. 36, 1153–1163 (2021).

  21. Panhuis, T. M., Butlin, R., Zuk, M. & Tregenza, T. Sexual selection and speciation. Trends Ecol. Evol. 16, 364–371 (2001).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Servedio, M. R. & Bürger, R. The counterintuitive role of sexual selection in species maintenance and speciation. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 8113–8118 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. 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  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. van der Bijl, W. & Mank, J. E. Widespread cryptic variation in genetic architecture between the sexes. Evol. Lett. 5, 359–369 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Chenoweth, S. F., Rundle, H. D. & Blows, M. W. Genetic constraints and the evolution of display trait sexual dimorphism by natural and sexual selection. Am. Nat. 171, 22–34 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Pennell, T. M., Haas, F. J. Hde, Morrow, E. H. & Doorn, G. S. V. Contrasting effects of intralocus sexual conflict on sexually antagonistic coevolution. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, E978–E986 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Cox, R. & Calsbeek, R. Sexually antagonistic selection, sexual dimorphism, and the resolution of intralocus sexual conflict. Am. Nat. 173, 176–187 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Bonduriansky, R. & Rowe, L. Sexual selection, genetic architecture, and the condition dependence of body shape in the sexually dimorphic fly Prochyliza xanthostoma (Piophilidae). Evolution 59, 138–151 (2005).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Van Doorn, G. S. Intralocus sexual conflict. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1168, 52–71 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Hawkes, M. F. et al. Intralocus sexual conflict and insecticide resistance. Proc. R. Soc. B 283, 20161429 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Stewart, A. D., Morrow, E. H. & Rice, W. R. Assessing putative interlocus sexual conflict in Drosophila melanogaster using experimental evolution. Proc. R. Soc. B 272, 2029–2035 (2005).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Dapper, A. L. & Lively, C. M. Interlocus sexually antagonistic coevolution can create indirect selection for increased recombination. Evolution 68, 1216–1224 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Kasimatis, K. R., Nelson, T. C. & Phillips, P. C. Genomic signatures of sexual conflict. J. Hered. 108, 780–790 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Tregenza, T., Wedell, N. & Chapman, T. Sexual conflict: a new paradigm? Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 361, 229–234 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Connallon, T. & Chenoweth, S. F. Dominance reversals and the maintenance of genetic variation for fitness. PLoS Biol. 17, e3000118 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Connallon, T. & Clark, A. G. The resolution of sexual antagonism by gene duplication. Genetics 187, 919–937 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Meisel, R. P. & Connallon, T. The faster-X effect: integrating theory and data. Trends Genet. 29, 537–544 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Connallon, T., Cox, R. M. & Calsbeek, R. Fitness consequences of sex-specific selection. Evolution 64, 1671–1682 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Houle, D. & Cheng, C. Predicting the evolution of sexual dimorphism in gene expression. Mol. Biol. Evol. 38, 1847–1859 (2021).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Grath, S. & Parsch, J. Sex-biased gene expression. Annu. Rev. Genet. 50, 29–44 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Mank, J. E. Sex chromosomes and the evolution of sexual dimorphism: lessons from the genome. Am. Nat. 173, 141–150 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Duret, L. & Mouchiroud, D. Expression pattern and, surprisingly, gene length shape codon usage in Caenorhabditis, Drosophila, and Arabidopsis. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 96, 4482–4487 (1999).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Gout, J.-F., Kahn, D., Duret, L. & Paramecium Post-Genomics Consortium. The relationship among gene expression, the evolution of gene dosage, and the rate of protein evolution. PLoS Genet. 6, e1000944 (2010).

  47. Pál, C., Papp, B. & Hurst, L. D. Highly expressed genes in yeast evolve slowly. Genetics 158, 927–931 (2001).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Drummond, A. J., Ho, S. Y. W., Phillips, M. J. & Rambaut, A. Relaxed phylogenetics and dating with confidence. PLoS Biol. 4, e88 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Rogers, T. F., Palmer, D. H. & Wright, A. E. Sex-specific selection drives the evolution of alternative splicing in birds. Mol. Biol. Evol. 38, 519–530 (2021).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Ellegren, H. & Parsch, J. The evolution of sex-biased genes and sex-biased gene expression. Nat. Rev. Genet. 8, 689–698 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Hunt, B. G., Ometto, L., Keller, L. & Goodisman, M. A. D. Evolution at two levels in fire ants: the relationship between patterns of gene expression and protein sequence evolution. Mol. Biol. Evol. 30, 263–271 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Khaitovich, P. et al. Parallel patterns of evolution in the genomes and transcriptomes of humans and chimpanzees. Science 309, 1850–1854 (2005).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. 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  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Parrett, J. M. et al. Genomic evidence that a sexually selected trait captures genome-wide variation and facilitates the purging of genetic load. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 6, 1330–1342 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Harrison, P. W. et al. Sexual selection drives evolution and rapid turnover of male gene expression. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 4393 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  56. Patlar, B., Jayaswal, V., Ranz, J. M. & Civetta, A. Nonadaptive molecular evolution of seminal fluid proteins in Drosophila. Evolution 75, 2102–2113 (2021).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  57. Dapper, A. L. & Wade, M. J. The evolution of sperm competition genes: the effect of mating system on levels of genetic variation within and between species. Evolution 70, 502–511 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  58. Dapper, A. L. & Wade, M. J. Relaxed selection and the rapid evolution of reproductive genes. Trends Genet. 36, 640–649 (2020).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Gershoni, M. & Pietrokovski, S. Reduced selection and accumulation of deleterious mutations in genes exclusively expressed in men. Nat. Commun. 5, 4438 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. 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  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Mank, J. E., Hultin‐Rosenberg, L., Zwahlen, M. & Ellegren, H. Pleiotropic constraint hampers the resolution of sexual antagonism in vertebrate gene expression. Am. Nat. 171, 35–43 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Orr, H. A. Adaptation and the cost of complexity. Evolution 54, 13–20 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Khodursky, S., Svetec, N., Durkin, S. M. & Zhao, L. The evolution of sex-biased gene expression in the Drosophila brain. Genome Res. 30, 874–884 (2020).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  64. Darolti, I. & Mank, J. E. Sex-biased gene expression at single-cell resolution: Cause and consequence of sexual dimorphism. 2022.11.08.515642 Preprint at https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.11.08.515642 (2022).

  65. Hollis, B., Houle, D., Yan, Z., Kawecki, T. J. & Keller, L. Evolution under monogamy feminizes gene expression in Drosophila melanogaster. Nat. Commun. 5, 3482 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Veltsos, P., Fang, Y., Cossins, A. R., Snook, R. R. & Ritchie, M. G. Mating system manipulation and the evolution of sex-biased gene expression in Drosophila. Nat. Commun. 8, 2072 (2017).

  67. Wang, X., Werren, J. H. & Clark, A. G. Genetic and epigenetic architecture of sex-biased expression in the jewel wasps Nasonia vitripennis and giraulti. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, E3545–E3554 (2015).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  68. Schenkel, M. A., Pen, I., Beukeboom, L. W. & Billeter, J.-C. Making sense of intralocus and interlocus sexual conflict. Ecol. Evol. 8, 13035–13050 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  69. Verta, J.-P. & Jacobs, A. The role of alternative splicing in adaptation and evolution. Trends Ecol. Evol. 37, 299–308 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Gan, Q. et al. Dynamic regulation of alternative splicing and chromatin structure in Drosophila gonads revealed by RNA-seq. Cell Res. 20, 763–783 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Singh, A. & Agrawal, A. F. Two forms of sexual dimorphism in gene expression in Drosophila melanogaster: their coincidence and evolutionary genetics. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.02.08.429268 (2021).

  72. Ruzicka, F. et al. Genome-wide sexually antagonistic variants reveal long-standing constraints on sexual dimorphism in fruit flies. PLoS Biol. 17, e3000244 (2019).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  73. Pennell, T. M. & Morrow, E. H. Two sexes, one genome: the evolutionary dynamics of intralocus sexual conflict. Ecol. Evol. 3, 1819–1834 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  74. Kokko, H. & Jennions, M. D. The relationship between sexual selection and sexual conflict. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol. 6, a017517 (2014).

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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Ruzicka, F. et al. The search for sexually antagonistic genes: practical insights from studies of local adaptation and statistical genomics. Evol. Lett. 4, 398–415 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  77. Connallon, T. & Clark, A. G. Balancing selection in species with separate sexes: insights from Fisher’s geometric model. Genetics 197, 991–1006 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  78. Fry, J. D. The genomic location of sexually antagonistic variation: some cautionary comments. Evolution 64, 1510–1516 (2010).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Barson, N. J. et al. Sex-dependent dominance at a single locus maintains variation in age at maturity in salmon. Nature 528, 405–408 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Pearse, D. E. et al. Sex-dependent dominance maintains migration supergene in rainbow trout. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 3, 1731–1742 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Grieshop, K. & Arnqvist, G. Sex-specific dominance reversal of genetic variation for fitness. PLoS Biol. 16, e2006810 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  82. Geeta Arun, M. et al. Experimental evolution reveals sex-specific dominance for surviving bacterial infection in laboratory populations of Drosophila melanogaster. Evol. Lett. 5, 657–671 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  83. Spencer, H. G. & Priest, N. K. The evolution of sex-specific dominance in response to sexually antagonistic selection. Am. Nat. 187, 658–666 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Grieshop, K., Ho, E. K. H. & Kasimatis, K. R. Dominance reversals, antagonistic pleiotropy, and the maintenance of genetic variation. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2109.01571 (2021).

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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Johnston, S. E. et al. Life history trade-offs at a single locus maintain sexually selected genetic variation. Nature 502, 93–95 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Wright, A. E. et al. Male-biased gene expression resolves sexual conflict through the evolution of sex-specific genetic architecture. Evol. Lett. 2, 52–61 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  88. Cheng, C. & Kirkpatrick, M. Sex-specific selection and sex-biased gene expression in humans and flies. PLoS Genet. 12, e1006170 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  89. Dutoit, L. et al. Sex-biased gene expression, sexual antagonism and levels of genetic diversity in the collared flycatcher (Ficedula albicollis) genome. Mol. Ecol. 27, 3572–3581 (2018).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Flanagan, S. P. & Jones, A. G. Genome-wide selection components analysis in a fish with male pregnancy. Evolution 71, 1096–1105 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Lucotte, E. A., Laurent, R., Heyer, E., Ségurel, L. & Toupance, B. Detection of allelic frequency differences between the sexes in humans: a signature of sexually antagonistic selection. Genome Biol. Evol. 8, 1489–1500 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  92. Kasimatis, K. R., Ralph, P. L. & Phillips, P. C. Limits to genomic divergence under sexually antagonistic selection. G3 9, 3813–3824 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  93. Wang, Z., Sun, L. & Paterson, A. D. Major sex differences in allele frequencies for X chromosomal variants in both the 1000 Genomes Project and gnomAD. PLoS Genet. 18, e1010231 (2022).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  94. Lin, Y. et al. Gene duplication to the Y chromosome in Trinidadian guppies. Mol. Ecol. 31, 1853–1863 (2022).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. 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  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  96. Lonn, E. et al. Balancing selection maintains polymorphisms at neurogenetic loci in field experiments. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, 3690–3695 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  97. Wright, A. E., Rogers, T. F., Fumagalli, M., Cooney, C. R. & Mank, J. E. Phenotypic sexual dimorphism is associated with genomic signatures of resolved sexual conflict. Mol. Ecol. 28, 2860–2871 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  98. Peñalba, J. V. & Wolf, J. B. W. From molecules to populations: appreciating and estimating recombination rate variation. Nat. Rev. Genet. 21, 476–492 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  99. Arbeithuber, B., Betancourt, A. J., Ebner, T. & Tiemann-Boege, I. Crossovers are associated with mutation and biased gene conversion at recombination hotspots. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 2109–2114 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  100. Jia, P. et al. MSEA: detection and quantification of mutation hotspots through mutation set enrichment analysis. Genome Biol. 15, 489 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  101. Rogozin, I. B. & Pavlov, Y. I. Theoretical analysis of mutation hotspots and their DNA sequence context specificity. Mutat. Res. 544, 65–85 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  102. Kupper, C. et al. A supergene determines highly divergent male reproductive morphs in the ruff. Nat. Genet. 48, 79–83 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  103. Lamichhaney, S. et al. Structural genomic changes underlie alternative reproductive strategies in the ruff (Philomachus pugnax). Nat. Genet. 48, 84–88 (2016).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  104. Kim, K.-W. et al. A sex-linked supergene controls sperm morphology and swimming speed in a songbird. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 1, 1168–1176 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  105. Cooney, C. R., Mank, J. E. & Wright, A. E. Constraint and divergence in the evolution of male and female recombination rates in fishes. Evolution 75, 2857–2866 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  106. Úbeda, F., Haig, D. & Patten, M. M. Stable linkage disequilibrium owing to sexual antagonism. Proc. R. Soc. B 278, 855–862 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  107. Slatkin, M. Linkage disequilibrium — understanding the evolutionary past and mapping the medical future. Nat. Rev. Genet. 9, 477–485 (2008).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  108. Bain, S. A. et al. Sex-specific expression and DNA methylation in a species with extreme sexual dimorphism and paternal genome elimination. Mol. Ecol. 30, 5687–5703 (2021).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  109. Wang, X. et al. Function and evolution of dna methylation in Nasonia vitripennis. PLoS Genet. 9, e1003872 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  110. Lemos, B., Branco, A. T. & Hartl, D. L. Epigenetic effects of polymorphic Y chromosomes modulate chromatin components, immune response, and sexual conflict. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 15826–15831 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  111. Oliva, M. et al. The impact of sex on gene expression across human tissues. Science 369, eaba3066 (2020).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  112. Arbeitman, M. N. et al. Gene expression during the life cycle of Drosophila melanogaster. Science 297, 2270–2275 (2002).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  113. Hale, M. C. et al. Differential gene expression in male and female rainbow trout embryos prior to the onset of gross morphological differentiation of the gonads. BMC Genomics 12, 404 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  114. Ingleby, F. C., Webster, C. L., Pennell, T. M., Flis, I. & Morrow, E. H. Sex-biased gene expression in Drosophila melanogaster is constrained by ontogeny and genetic architecture. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.1101/034728 (2016).

  115. Kohli, S. et al. Genome and transcriptome analysis of the mealybug Maconellicoccus hirsutus: correlation with its unique phenotypes. Genomics 113, 2483–2494 (2021).

  116. Magnusson, K. et al. Transcription regulation of sex-biased genes during ontogeny in the malaria vector anopheles gambiae. PLoS ONE 6, e21572 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  117. Muramatsu, M. et al. Sex-specific expression profiles of ecdysteroid biosynthesis and ecdysone response genes in extreme sexual dimorphism of the mealybug Planococcus kraunhiae (Kuwana). PLoS ONE 15, e0231451 (2020).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  118. Omar, M. A. A. et al. The functional difference of eight chitinase genes between male and female of the cotton mealybug, Phenacoccus solenopsis: chitinase genes between sexes of cotton mealybugs. Insect Mol. Biol. 28, 550–567 (2019).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  119. Ometto, L., Shoemaker, D., Ross, K. G. & Keller, L. Evolution of gene expression in fire ants: the effects of developmental stage, caste, and species. Mol. Biol. Evol. 28, 1381–1392 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  120. Perry, J. C., Harrison, P. W. & Mank, J. E. The ontogeny and evolution of sex-biased gene expression in Drosophila melanogaster. Mol. Biol. Evol. 31, 1206–1219 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  121. Zhao, M. et al. Global expression profile of silkworm genes from larval to pupal stages: toward a comprehensive understanding of sexual differences: sexual differences of global gene expression in silkworm from larval to pupal stages. Insect Sci. 18, 607–618 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  122. Eads, B. D., Colbourne, J. K., Bohuski, E. & Andrews, J. Profiling sex-biased gene expression during parthenogenetic reproduction in Daphnia pulex. BMC Genomics 8, 464 (2007).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  123. Hosken, D. J., Archer, C. R. & Mank, J. E. Sexual conflict. Curr. Biol. 29, R451–R455 (2019).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  124. Galliard, J.-F. L. & Ferrière, R. Evolution of maximal endurance capacity: natural and sexual selection across age classes in a lizard. Evol. Ecol. Res. 10, 157–176 (2008).

  125. Husak, J. F. Does speed help you survive? A test with collared lizards of different ages. Funct. Ecol. 20, 174–179 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  126. Preziosi, R. F. & Fairbairn, D. J. Lifetime selection on adult body size and components of body size in a waterstrider: opposing selection and maintenance of sexual size dimorphism. Evolution 54, 558–566 (2000).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  127. Svensson, E. I. & Waller, J. T. Ecology and sexual selection: evolution of wing pigmentation in calopterygid damselflies in relation to latitude, sexual dimorphism, and speciation. Am. Nat. 182, E174–E195 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  128. Zikovitz, A. E. & Agrawal, A. F. The condition dependency of fitness in males and females: the fitness consequences of juvenile diet assessed in environments differing in key adult resources. Evolution 67, 2849–2860 (2013).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  129. Wright, A. E. & Mank, J. E. The scope and strength of sex‐specific selection in genome evolution. J. Evol. Biol. 26, 1841–1853 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  130. Arnold, S. J. & Wade, M. J. On the measurement of natural and sexual selection: applications. Evolution 38, 720–734 (1984).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  131. Arnold, S. J. & Wade, M. J. On the measurement of natural and sexual selection: theory. Evolution 38, 709–719 (1984).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  132. Clancey, E., Johnson, T. R., Harmon, L. J. & Hohenlohe, P. A. Estimation of the strength of mate preference from mated pairs observed in the wild. Evolution 76, 29–41 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  133. Fisher, R. A. The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection (Clarendon, 1930).

  134. Kirkpatrick, M. Sexual selection and the evolution of female choice. Evolution 36, 1–12 (1982).

  135. Prum, R. O. The Lande–Kirkpatrick mechanism is the null model of evolution by intersexual selection: implications for meaning, honesty, and design in intersexual signals. Evolution 64, 3085–3100 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  136. Zahavi, A. Mate selection—a selection for a handicap. J. Theor. Biol. 53, 205–214 (1975).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  137. Hamilton, W. D. & Zuk, M. Heritable true fitness and bright birds: a role for parasites?. Science 218, 384–387 (1982).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  138. West-Eberhard, M. J. Sexual selection, social competition, and speciation. Q. Rev. Biol. 58, 155–183 (1983).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  139. Basolo, A. L. Female preference predates the evolution of the sword in swordtail fish. Science 250, 808–810 (1990).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  140. McGlothlin, J. W., Cox, R. M. & Brodie, E. D. Sex-specific selection and the evolution of between-sex genetic covariance. J. Hered. 110, 422–432 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  141. Simmons, L. W. Sperm Competition and Its Evolutionary Consequences in the Insects. Sperm Competition and Its Evolutionary Consequences in the Insects (Princeton Univ. Press, 2019).

  142. Plesnar-Bielak, A. & Łukasiewicz, A. Sexual conflict in a changing environment. Biol. Rev. 96, 1854–1867 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  143. Arbuthnott, D., Dutton, E. M., Agrawal, A. F. & Rundle, H. D. The ecology of sexual conflict: ecologically dependent parallel evolution of male harm and female resistance in Drosophila melanogaster. Ecol. Lett. 17, 221–228 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  144. Connallon, T. & Hall, M. D. Genetic correlations and sex-specific adaptation in changing environments. Evolution 70, 2186–2198 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  145. Delph, L. F. et al. Environment-dependent intralocus sexual conflict in a dioecious plant. N. Phytol. 192, 542–552 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  146. Connallon, T. & Clark, A. G. Evolutionary inevitability of sexual antagonism. Proc. R. Soc. B 281, 20132123 (2014).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  147. Martinossi-Allibert, I. et al. The consequences of sexual selection in well-adapted and maladapted populations of bean beetles†. Evolution 72, 518–530 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  148. Yun, L., Chen, P. J., Singh, A., Agrawal, A. F. & Rundle, H. D. The physical environment mediates male harm and its effect on selection in females. Proc. R. Soc. B 284, 20170424 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  149. García-Roa, R., Chirinos, V. & Carazo, P. The ecology of sexual conflict: Temperature variation in the social environment can drastically modulate male harm to females. Funct. Ecol. 33, 681–692 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  150. De Lisle, S. P., Goedert, D., Reedy, A. M. & Svensson, E. I. Climatic factors and species range position predict sexually antagonistic selection across taxa. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 373, 20170415 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  151. Connallon, T. The geography of sex-specific selection, local adaptation, and sexual dimorphism. Evolution 69, 2333–2344 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  152. Mank, J. E., Nam, K., Brunstrom, B. & Ellegren, H. Ontogenetic complexity of sexual dimorphism and sex-specific selection. Mol. Biol. Evol. 27, 1570–1578 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  153. Price, P. D. et al. Detecting signatures of selection on gene expression. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 6, 1035–1045 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  154. Wiberg, R. A. W., Veltsos, P., Snook, R. R. & Ritchie, M. G. Experimental evolution supports signatures of sexual selection in genomic divergence. Evol. Lett. 5, 214–229 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  155. Sayadi, A. et al. The genomic footprint of sexual conflict. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 3, 1725–1730 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  156. Rowe, L., Chenoweth, S. F. & Agrawal, A. F. The genomics of sexual conflict. Am. Nat. 192, 274–286 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  157. Nuzhdin, S. V., Wayne, M. L., Harmon, K. L. & McIntyre, L. M. Common pattern of evolution of gene expression level and protein sequence in Drosophila. Mol. Biol. Evol. 21, 1308–1317 (2004).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge Ngāi Tūāhuriri, the Wurundjeri and Boon Wurrung peoples of the Kulin nation, and the xʷməθkʷəy̓əm (Musqueam) people, upon whose lands this work was conducted. This work was supported by the Marsden Fund Council from government funding, managed by Royal Society Te Apārangi (grant UOC1904) and the Australian Research Council (FT190100014 and DP220100245). J.E.M. gratefully acknowledges funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada and a Canada 150 Research Chair. We thank T. Connallon, A. Wright and A. Jones for feedback on early drafts of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Biological Sciences, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand

    Nicole M. Tosto, Emily R. Beasley & Sarah P. Flanagan

  2. School of Biological Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

    Bob B. M. Wong

  3. Department of Zoology and Biodiversity Research Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

    Judith E. Mank

Authors
  1. Nicole M. Tosto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Emily R. Beasley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bob B. M. Wong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Judith E. Mank
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sarah P. Flanagan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

S.P.F. conceived this work and all concepts were shaped by discussions with N.M.T., E.R.B., B.B.M.W. and J.E.M.; S.P.F., N.M.T. and E.R.B. wrote the first draft of the manuscript, and N.M.T., E.R.B., B.B.M.W., J.E.M. and S.P.F. edited subsequent drafts.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sarah P. Flanagan.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Ecology & Evolution thanks the anonymous reviewers for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Additional information

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

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tosto, N.M., Beasley, E.R., Wong, B.B.M. et al. The roles of sexual selection and sexual conflict in shaping patterns of genome and transcriptome variation. Nat Ecol Evol 7, 981–993 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-023-02019-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-023-02019-7

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