There was no significant effect of replicate line on the logg(time until the first mating) (F3 ,66=2.30, F>0.05, Table 6.2(b)). There was no significant difference in the logg(time until the first mating) by females from the high, low or control selection regimes (F2 3=0.07, F>0.75, Table 6.2(b)).
6.5 DISCUSSION
There was no evidence for a genetic correlation between male and female mating
frequency, in the stalk-eyed fly Cyrtodiopsis dalmanni. Artificial selection for increased and decreased male mating frequency (number of matings) produced a direct response in both directions (Baker et at. in prep.)- However, here I found no significant differences in the mating frequency of females from these high, low or control selection regimes, when mating frequency was estimated either directly (number of matings) or indirectly (time until the first mating).
If mating frequency was controlled by the same genes in males and females, females might mate beyond their optimal frequency if there was stronger selection on males to mate at a high frequency than on females to mate just once or a few times (Halliday & Amold
1987). A cost of reproduction in female C. dalmanni could impose selection pressure on females to limit their mating frequency (Reguera et al. submitted). Strong selection on females to reduce mating frequency could lead to the evolution of modifying elements to limit the expression of genes which increase mating frequency (Sherman & Westneat
1988). This would lead to sex limitation in the genes determining mating frequency.
The lack of genetic correlation between the sexes for mating frequency in C. dalmanni
suggests that mating frequency is under the control of different or sex-limited genes in males and females. Little is known regarding the determinants of male and female
remating in this species. Experimental evidence suggests females are stimulated to remate by visual cues. Given a pairwise choice, females mate more frequently with males with large eyespan than with small eyespan males. The strength of female preference is influenced by the difference in eyespan between males (Hingle et al. 2001b). Female mating frequency is also related to female eyespan, large eyespan females mate more frequently than small females (see Chapter 3, section 3.4.3). Large eyespan females have significantly more mature eggs in their ovaries and mate at a higher frequency than small eyespan females, perhaps to maximise their fertility (see Chapter 3, section 3.4.1). The
difference in mating frequency between large and small eyespan females could also be due to males preferring to mate with large, more fecund females. This could indicate that visual cues are also important in stimulating male mating. There are many other factors that could determine remating in both male and female C. dalmanni. These include environmental influences such as availability of oviposition sites, or physiological limitations such as ejaculate size or sperm storage capacity, or chemical cues such as male accessory gland proteins (although see Chapter 5).
The lack o f a genetic correlation between the sexes for mating frequency in C. dalmanni is consistent with evidence from D. melanogaster (Sgro et al. 1998). The factors involved in determining remating in D. melanogaster are well characterised, in comparison with C.
dalmanni, and differ between the sexes. Female D. melanogaster are stimulated to remate by nutritional status (Harshman et al. 1988), availability of oviposition sites (Trevitt et al.
1988), sperm storage (Letsinger & Gromko 1985), and accessory gland proteins transferred by males with sperm (Chen et al. 1988). Males are stimulated to remate by visual stimuli (Willmund & Ewing 1982), female epicuticular hydrocarbons (Scott 1986) and the number of recent matings obtained (Markow et al. 1978). If different factors determine mating in males and females, it is unlikely that selection on the mating
frequency in one sex will significantly affect the mating frequency of the unselected sex.
A genetic correlation between the sexes in C. dalmanni could be underestimated if a particular form of non-random mating occurred in the selection line (Butlin 1993). Disassortative mating for mating frequency would occur if male C. dalmanni from lines selected to mate at a high frequency preferentially mated with females with low mating frequency, or males from lines selected to mate at a low frequency mated preferentially with fast mating females. Disassortative mating would then inadvertently result in selection on female mating frequency. This would obscure the appearance of any genetic correlation present.
The problem of non-random mating within selected lines can be addressed by enforcing random pairing between males and females (e.g. Sgro et al. 1998). The selection protocol used for the lines evaluated here involved partially enforced random mating (Baker et al. in prep.). In each generation, selected males were placed with 5 selection line females chosen at random. The imposition of equal family size can also reduce variation between lines due to disassortative mating (Sgro et al. 1998). During selection of the lines tested here, family size variation was minimised, but not eliminated. The contribution of different males to future generations was equalised across all regimes by taking an equal number of progeny from each selected male every generation. However, as each male was placed together with 5 females, it is possible that the contribution by females varied across regimes. Rigorously enforced random mating and equalisation of family sizes would require equal numbers of offspring to have been taken from individual males paired with single, randomly-chosen females. It would be interesting in future experiments to determine the extent of non- random mating by testing for disassortative and assortative mating in laboratory and field populations of C. dalmanni. The present study however provides no evidence for a genetic correlation between males and females for mating frequency in the stalk-eyed fly, C.
dalmanni. The hypothesis that female mating frequency has evolved as a correlated response to selection on male mating frequency is not supported.
6.5 TABLES
Table 6.1. Mean ± standard error for the number of matings, and the time until the first mating, for females from the high, low and control lines artificially selected for male mating frequency.
Selection regime Replicate line No. of matings Time until first mating (s)
High 1 13.22 ± 0 .7 8 2159.58 ±274.47 2 11.97 ± 0 .7 4 1543.62 ± 235.44 Control 1 12.50 ± 0 .6 0 1726.51 ± 183.13 2 13.62 ± 0 .6 8 1593.53 ± 166.17 Low 1 12.78 ± 0.72 1746.90 ± 153.19 2 13.09 ± 0 .5 5 1690.83 ± 185.92
Table 6.2. ANOVA of a) number of matings and b) logç(time until the first mating) of females from the high, low and control lines artificially selected for male mating frequency, with selection regime (fixed effect) and replicate line nested within selection regime
(random effect).
Source of variation
s s
df
MS
F P(a) Number of matings
Selection regime 7.54
2
3.77 0.24 >0.75Replicate line within selection regime' 46.81 3 15.60 1.05 >0.25
Error^ 2758.13 186 14.83
(b) logg(time to the first mating)
Selection regime 0.11 2 0.05 0.07 >0.75
Replicate line within selection regime' 2.39 3 0.80 2.30 >0.05
Error^
1 T? ^ r X yffT seiection re g im e
57.59 166 0.35