No evidence of sexual selection in a repetition of Bateman’s classic study of Drosophila melanogaster

We are unique in reporting a repetition of Bateman [Bateman AJ (1948) Heredity (Edinb) 2:349–368] using his methods of parentage assignment, which linked sex differences in variance of reproductive success and variance in number of mates in small populations of Drosophila melanogaster . Using offspr...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - PNAS Vol. 109; no. 29; pp. 11740 - 11745
Main Authors Gowaty, Patricia Adair, Kim, Yong-Kyu, Anderson, Wyatt W
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published United States National Academy of Sciences 17.07.2012
National Acad Sciences
SeriesFrom the Cover
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:We are unique in reporting a repetition of Bateman [Bateman AJ (1948) Heredity (Edinb) 2:349–368] using his methods of parentage assignment, which linked sex differences in variance of reproductive success and variance in number of mates in small populations of Drosophila melanogaster . Using offspring phenotypes, we inferred who mated with whom and assigned offspring to parents. Like Bateman, we cultured adults expressing dramatic phenotypes, so that each adult was heterozygous-dominant at its unique marker locus but had only wild-type alleles at all other subjects’ marker loci. Assuming no viability effects of parental markers on offspring, the frequencies of parental phenotypes in offspring follow Mendelian expectations: one-quarter will be double-mutants who inherit the dominant gene from each parent, the offspring from which Bateman counted the number of mates per breeder; half of the offspring must be single mutants inheriting the dominant gene of one parent and the wild-type allele of the other parent; and one-quarter would inherit neither of their parent’s marker mutations. Here we show that inviability of double-mutant offspring biased inferences of mate number and number of offspring on which rest inferences of sex differences in fitness variances. Bateman’s method overestimated subjects with zero mates, underestimated subjects with one or more mates, and produced systematically biased estimates of offspring number by sex. Bateman’s methodology mismeasured fitness variances that are the key variables of sexual selection.
Bibliography:http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1207851109
ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
Author contributions: P.A.G., Y.-K.K., and W.W.A. designed research; P.A.G. analyzed data; Y.-K.K. supervised technicians who carried out the experiment, and entered observations into computerized records; and P.A.G. wrote the paper.
Contributed by Wyatt W. Anderson, May 11, 2012 (sent for review January 8, 2012)
ISSN:0027-8424
1091-6490
DOI:10.1073/pnas.1207851109