Search

Sexually dimorphic traits are likely to have evolved through sexually antagonistic selection. However, recent empirical data suggest that intralocus sexual conflict often persists, even when traits have diverged between males and females. This implies that evolved dimorphism is often incomplete in resolving intralocus conflict, providing a mechanism for the maintenance of genetic variance in fitness-related traits. We used experimental evolution in Drosophila melanogaster to directly test for ongoing conflict over a suite of sexually dimorphic cuticular hydrocarbons (CHCs) that are likely targets of sex-specific selection. Using a set of experimental populations in which the transmission of genetic material had been restricted to males for 82 generations, we show that CHCs did not evolve, providing experimental evidence for the absence of current intralocus sexual conflict over these traits. The absence of ongoing conflict could indicate that CHCs have never been the target of sexually antagonistic selection, although this would require the existing dimorphism to have evolved via completely sexlinked mutations or as a result of former, but now absent, pleiotropic effects of the underlying loci on another trait under sexually antagonistic selection. An alternative interpretation, and which we believe to be more likely, is that the extensive CHC sexual dimorphism is the result of past intralocus sexual conflict that has been fully resolved, implying that these traits have evolved genetic independence between the sexes and that genetic variation in them is therefore maintained by alternative mechanisms. This latter interpretation is consistent with the known roles of CHCs in sexual communication in this species and with previous studies suggesting the genetic independence of CHCs between males and females. Nevertheless, direct estimates of sexually antagonistic selection will be important to fully resolve these alternatives.

Mating has been widely reported to be a costly event for females. Studies indicate that female cost of mating in terms of fecundity and survivorship can be affected by their mates, leading to antagonistic coevolution between the sexes. However, as of now, there is no evidence that the female cost of mating in terms of immune defence is affected by their mates. We assess the effect of different sized males on antibacterial immune defence and reproductive fitness of their mates. We used a large outbred population of Drososphila melanogaster as the host and Serratia marcescens as the pathogen. We generated three different male phenotypes: small, medium and large, by manipulating larval densities. Compared to females mating with small males, those mating with large males had higher bacterial loads and lower fecundity. There was no significant effect of male phenotype on the fraction of females mated or copulation duration (an indicator of ejaculate investment). Thus, our study is the first clear demonstration that male phenotype can affect the cost of mating to females in terms of their antibacterial immune defence. Mating with large males imposes an additional cost of mating to females in terms of reduced immune defence. The observed results are very likely due to qualitative/quantitative differences in the ejaculates of the three different types of males. If the phenotypic variation that we observed in males in our study is mirrored by genetic variation, then, it can potentially lead to antagonistic coevolution of the sexes over immune defence.

A series of laboratory selection experiments on Drosophila melanogaster over the past two decades has provided insights into the specifics of life-history tradeoffs in the species and greatly refined our understanding of how ecology and genetics interact in life-history evolution. Much of what has been learnt from these studies about the subtlety of the microevolutionary process also has significant implications for experimental design and inference in organismal biology beyond life-history evolution, as well as for studies of evolution in the wild. Here we review work on the ecology and evolution of life-histories in laboratory populations of D. melanogaster, emphasizing how environmental effects on life-history-related traits can influence evolutionary change. We discuss life-history tradeoffs - many unexpected - revealed by selection experiments, and also highlight recent work that underscores the importance to life-history evolution of cross-generation and cross-life-stage effects and interactions, sexual antagonism and sexual dimorphism, population dynamics, and the possible role of biological clocks in timing life-history events. Finally, we discuss some of the limitations of typical selection experiments, and how these limitations might be transcended in the future by a combination of more elaborate and realistic selection experiments, developmental evolutionary biology, and the emerging discipline of phenomics.

Both strong directional selection and faster development are thought to destabilize development, giving rise to greater fluctuating asymmetry (FA), although there is no strong empirical evidence supporting this assertion. We compared FA in sternopleural bristle number in four populations of Drosophila melanogaster successfully selected for faster development from egg to adult, and in four control populations. The fraction of perfectly symmetric individuals was higher in the selected populations, whereas the FA levels did not differ significantly between selected and control populations, clearly indicating that directional selection for faster development has not led to increased FA in sternopleural bristle number in these populations. This may be because: (i) development time and FA are uncorrelated, (ii) faster development does result in FA, but selection has favoured developmentally stable individuals that can develop fast and still be symmetrical, or (iii) the increased fraction of symmetric individuals in the selected populations is an artifact of reduced body size. Although we cannot discriminate among these explanations, our results suggest that the relationship between development time, FA and fitness may be far more subtle than often thought.