IMPACT OF EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN ON DROSOPHILA SEXUAL ISOLATION STUDIES: DIRECT EFFECTS AND COMPARISON TO FIELD HYBRIDIZATION DATA

Abstract Many studies of speciation rely critically on estimates of sexual isolation obtained in the laboratory. Here we examine the sensitivity of sexual isolation to alterations in experimental design and mating environment in two sister species of Drosophila, D. santomea and D. yakuba. We use a newly devised measure of mating frequencies that is able to disentangle sexual isolation from species differences in mating propensity. Variation in fly density, presence or absence of a quasi-natural environment, degree of starvation, and relative frequency of species had little or no effect on sexual isolation, but one factor did have a significant effect: the possibility of choice. Designs that allowed flies to choose between conspecific and heterospecific mates showed significantly more sexual isolation than other designs that did not allow choice. These experiments suggest that sexual isolation between these species (whose ranges overlap on the island of São Tomé) is due largely to discrimination against D. yakuba males by D. santomea females. This suggestion was confirmed by direct observations of mating behavior. Drosophila santomea males also court D. yakuba females less ardently than conspecific females, whereas neither males nor females of D. yakuba show strong mate discrimination. Thus, sexual isolation appears to be a result of evolutionary changes in the derived island endemic D. santomea. Surprisingly, as reported in a companion paper (Llopart et al. 2005), the genotypes of hybrids found in nature do not accord with expectations from these laboratory studies: all F1 hybrids in nature come from matings between D. santomea females and D. yakuba males, matings that occur only rarely in the laboratory.

[1]  M. Noor,et al.  Simulating Natural Conditions in the Laboratory: A Re-Examination of Sexual Isolation between Sympatric and Allopatric Populations of Drosophila pseudoobscura and D. persimilis , 2006, Behavior genetics.

[2]  J. Coyne,et al.  AN ANOMALOUS HYBRID ZONE IN DROSOPHILA , 2005, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[3]  A. Caballero,et al.  Comparing the estimation properties of different statistics for measuring sexual isolation from mating frequencies , 2005 .

[4]  J. Cornuet,et al.  Assortative Mating in Sympatric Host Races of the European Corn Borer , 2005, Science.

[5]  S. Levin,et al.  LEAKY PREZYGOTIC ISOLATION AND POROUS GENOMES: RAPID INTROGRESSION OF MATERNALLY INHERITED DNA , 2005, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[6]  Chung-I Wu,et al.  Evolution of Sexual Isolation during Secondary Contact: Genotypic versus Phenotypic Changes in Laboratory Populations , 2005, The American Naturalist.

[7]  W. Etges,et al.  Pre-mating isolation is determined by larval rearing substrates in cactophilicDrosophila mojavensis. II. Effects of larval substrates on time to copulation, mate choice and mating propensity , 1993, Evolutionary Ecology.

[8]  Susannah Elwyn,et al.  Genetic studies of two sister species in the Drosophila melanogaster subgroup, D. yakuba and D. santomea. , 2004, Genetical research.

[9]  E. Rolán-Alvarez,et al.  Testing alternative models for sexual isolation in natural populations of Littorina saxatilis: indirect support for by‐product ecological speciation? , 2004, Journal of evolutionary biology.

[10]  W. Etges,et al.  Premating Isolation Is Determined by Larval Rearing Substrates in CactophilicDrosophila mojavensis. III. Epicuticular Hydrocarbon Variation Is Determined by Use of Different Host Plants inDrosophila mojavensis andDrosophila arizonae , 1997, Journal of Chemical Ecology.

[11]  S. Pitnick Operational sex ratios and sperm limitation in populations of Drosophila pachea , 1993, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[12]  E. Rolán-Alvarez,et al.  Evolution of asymmetry in sexual isolation: a criticism of a test case , 2004 .

[13]  J. Coyne,et al.  SEXUAL ISOLATION BETWEEN TWO SIBLING SPECIES WITH OVERLAPPING RANGES: DROSOPHILA SANTOMEA AND DROSOPHILA YAKUBA , 2002, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[14]  J. Boughman How sensory drive can promote speciation , 2002 .

[15]  J. Coyne,et al.  GENETICS OF A DIFFERENCE IN PIGMENTATION BETWEEN DROSOPHILA YAKUBA AND DROSOPHILA SANTOMEA , 2002, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[16]  B. Crespi,et al.  Host-plant adaptation drives the parallel evolution of reproductive isolation , 2002, Nature.

[17]  W. Etges,et al.  Premating Isolation Is Determined by Larval‐Rearing Substrates in Cactophilic Drosophila mojavensis. V. Deep Geographic Variation in Epicuticular Hydrocarbons among Isolated Populations* , 2001, The American Naturalist.

[18]  J. McCarter,et al.  The population genetics of the origin and divergence of the Drosophila simulans complex species. , 2000, Genetics.

[19]  F. Lemeunier,et al.  Evolutionary novelties in islands: Drosophila santomea, a new melanogaster sister species from São Tomé , 2000, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[20]  A. Caballero,et al.  ESTIMATING SEXUAL SELECTION AND SEXUAL ISOLATION EFFECTS FROM MATING FREQUENCIES , 2000, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[21]  P. Wirtz Mother species–father species: unidirectional hybridization in animals with female choice , 1999, Animal Behaviour.

[22]  A. Clark,et al.  INFERENCE OF SPERM COMPETITION FROM BROODS OF FIELD‐CAUGHT DROSOPHILA , 1998, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[23]  M. Carracedo,et al.  DISENTANGLING THE EFFECTS OF MATING PROPENSITY AND MATING CHOICE IN DROSOPHILA , 1998, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[24]  H. A. Orr,et al.  “PATTERNS OF SPECIATION IN DROSOPHILA” REVISITED , 1997, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[25]  M. Noor Absence of species discrimination in Drosophila pseudoobscura and D. persimilis males , 1996, Animal Behaviour.

[26]  J. Coyne Genetics of sexual isolation in male hybrids of Drosophila simulans and D. mauritiana. , 1996, Genetical research.

[27]  M. Noor Speciation driven by natural selection in Drosophila , 1995, Nature.

[28]  C. Aquadro,et al.  Sexual isolation in Drosophila melanogaster: a possible case of incipient speciation. , 1995, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[29]  J. Coyne,et al.  Genetics of a pheromonal difference contributing to reproductive isolation in Drosophila. , 1994, Science.

[30]  J. Feder,et al.  Host fidelity is an effective premating barrier between sympatric races of the apple maggot fly. , 1994, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[31]  J. Endler Signals, Signal Conditions, and the Direction of Evolution , 1992, The American Naturalist.

[32]  R. A. Krebs,et al.  The mating behavior of Drosophila mojavensis on organ pipe and agriacactus , 1991 .

[33]  H. A. Orr,et al.  PATTERNS OF SPECIATION IN DROSOPHILA , 1989, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[34]  W. Rice ANALYZING TABLES OF STATISTICAL TESTS , 1989, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[35]  T. Shelly Waiting for Mates: Variation in Female Encounter Rates Within and Between Leks of Drosophila Conformis , 1989 .

[36]  K. Kaneshiro,et al.  The Significance of Asymmetrical Sexual Isolation and the Formation of New Species , 1987 .

[37]  D. Gilbert,et al.  STATISTICS OF SEXUAL ISOLATION , 1985, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[38]  K. Kaneshiro SEXUAL ISOLATION, SPECIATION AND THE DIRECTION OF EVOLUTION , 1980, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[39]  J. Ringo,et al.  MALE MATING DISCRIMINATION IN DROSOPHILA MELANOGASTER, D. SIMULANS AND THEIR HYBRIDS , 1980, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[40]  Takao K. Watanabe,et al.  Mating Preference and the Direction of Evolution in Drosophila , 1979, Science.

[41]  M. E. Jacobs Influence ofβ-alanine on mating and territorialism inDrosophila melanogaster , 1978 .

[42]  M. E. Jacobs Influence of beta-alanine on mating and territorialism in Drosophila melanogaster. , 1978, Behavior genetics.

[43]  R. Lewontin,et al.  Selective mating, assortative mating, and inbreeding: definitions and implications. , 1968, Eugenics quarterly.

[44]  L. Ehrman DIRECT OBSERVATION OF SEXUAL ISOLATION BETWEEN ALLOPATRIC AND BETWEEN SYMPATRIC STRAINS OF THE DIFFERENT DROSOPHILA PAULISTORUM RACES , 1965 .

[45]  H. Levene,et al.  A STUDY OF SEXUAL ISOLATION BETWEEN CERTAIN STRAINS OF DROSOPHILA PAULISTORUM , 1965 .

[46]  L. Ehrman The genetics of sexual isolation in Drosophila paulistorum. , 1961, Genetics.

[47]  D. Poulson,et al.  Evolution in the Genus Drosophila , 1954, The Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine.

[48]  D. J. Merrell Sexual Isolation between Drosophila persimilis and Drosophila pseudoobscura , 1954, The American Naturalist.

[49]  C. C. Tan Genetics of Sexual Isolation between DROSOPHILA PSEUDOOBSCURA and DROSOPHILA PERSIMILIS. , 1946, Genetics.

[50]  T. Dobzhansky,et al.  Experiments on Sexual Isolation in Drosophila: V. The Effect of Varying Proportions of Drosophila Pseudoobscura and Drosophilia Persimilis on the Frequency of Insemination in Mixed Populations. , 1945, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.