Reproductive Behaviour Evolves Rapidly When Intralocus Sexual Conflict Is Removed
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Intralocus sexual conflict can inhibit the evolution of each sex towards its own fitness optimum. In a previous study, we confirmed this prediction through the experimental removal of female selection pressures in Drosophila melanogaster, achieved by limiting the expression of all major chromosomes to males. Compared to the control populations (C(1-4)) where the genomes are exposed to selection in both sexes, the populations with male-limited genomes (ML(1-4)) showed rapid increases in male fitness, whereas the fitness of females expressing ML-evolved chromosomes decreased. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Here we examine the behavioural phenotype underlying this sexual antagonism. We show that males expressing the ML genomes have a reduced courtship level but acquire the same number of matings. On the other hand, our data suggest that females expressing the ML genomes had reduced attractiveness, stimulating a lower rate of courtship from males. Moreover, females expressing ML genomes tend to display reduced yeast-feeding behaviour, which is probably linked to the reduction of their fecundity. CONCLUSION/SIGNIFICANCE: These results suggest that reproductive behaviour is shaped by opposing selection on males and females, and that loci influencing attractiveness and foraging were polymorphic for alleles with sexually antagonistic expression patterns prior to ML selection. Hence, intralocus sexual conflict appears to play a role in the evolution of a wide range of fitness-related traits and may be a powerful mechanism for the maintenance of genetic variation in fitness.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".