Fulltext

Mate choice for genetic quality when environments vary: suggestions for empirical progress

Bussière, Luc ; Hunt, John ; Stölting, Kai ; Jennions, Michael ; Brooks, Robert

In: Genetica, 2008, vol. 134, no. 1, p. 69-78

Ajouter à la liste personnelle
    Titre
    • Mate choice for genetic quality when environments vary: suggestions for empirical progress
    Auteur
    • Bussière, Luc. Zoologisches Museum der Universität Zürich, Winterthurerstrasse 190, CH 8057, Zürich, Switzerland
    • Hunt, John. Centre for Ecology and Conservation, School of Biosciences, The University of Exeter in Cornwall, TR10 9EZ, Penryn, UK
    • Stölting, Kai. Zoologisches Museum der Universität Zürich, Winterthurerstrasse 190, CH 8057, Zürich, Switzerland
    • Jennions, Michael. School of Botany and Zoology, Australian National University, 0200, Canberra, ACT, Australia
    • Brooks, Robert. Evolution & Ecology Research Centre and School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of New South Wales, 2052, Sydney, NSW, Australia
    Type de document
    • Postprint
    Identifiant OAI-PMH
    • oai:doc.rero.ch:316728
    Summary
    Mate choice for good-genes remains one of the most controversial evolutionary processes ever proposed. This is partly because strong directional choice should theoretically deplete the genetic variation that explains the evolution of this type of female mating preference (the so-called lek paradox). Moreover, good-genes benefits are generally assumed to be too small to outweigh opposing direct selection on females. Here, we review recent progress in the study of mate choice for genetic quality, focussing particularly on the potential for genotype by environment interactions (GEIs) to rescue additive genetic variation for quality, and thereby resolve the lek paradox. We raise five questions that we think will stimulate empirical progress in this field, and suggest directions for research in each area: (1) How is condition-dependence affected by environmental variation? (2) How important are GEIs for maintaining additive genetic variance in condition? (3) How much do GEIs reduce the signalling value of male condition? (4) How does GEI affect the multivariate version of the lek paradox? (5) Have mating biases for high-condition males evolved because of indirect benefits?