Abstract
AbstractThe evolution of sexual dimorphisms requires divergence between sexes in the evolutionary trajectories of the traits involved. Discerning how genetic architecture could facilitate such divergence has proven challenging because of the difficulty in estimating non-additive and sex-linked genetic variances using traditional quantitative genetic designs. Here we use a three-generation, double-first-cousin pedigree design to estimate additive, sex-linked and dominance (co)variances for 12 traits in the water strider, Aquarius remigis. Comparisons among these traits, which have size ratios ranging from 1 to 5 (larger/smaller), allow us to ask if sexual dimorphisms are associated with characteristic patterns of quantitative genetic variation. We frame our analysis around three main questions, derived from existing theory and empirical evidence: Are sexual dimorphisms associated with (1) lower additive inter-sex genetic correlations, (2) higher proportions of sex-linked variance, or (3) differences between sexes in autosomal additive and dominance genetic variances? For questions (1) and (2), we find weak and non-significant trends in the expected directions, which preclude definitive conclusions. However, in answer to question (3), we find strong evidence for a positive relationship between sexual dimorphism and differences between sexes in proportions of autosomal dominance variance. We also find strong interactions among the three genetic components indicating that their relative influence differs among traits and between sexes. These results highlight the need to include all three components of genetic (co)variance in both theoretical evolutionary models and empirical estimations of the genetic architecture of dimorphic traits.
Funder
National Science Foundation
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Genetics (clinical),Genetics
Reference78 articles.
1. Arnqvist G, Rowe L (2002) Correlated evolution of male and female morphologies in water striders. Evolution 56(5):936–947
2. Arnqvist G, Vellnow N, Rowe L (2014) The effect of epistasis on sexually antagonistic genetic variation. Proc Biol Sci R Soc 281:1787
3. Barson NJ, Aykanat T, Hindar K, Baranski M, Bolstad GH, Fiske P et al. (2015) Sex-dependent dominance at a single locus maintains variation in age at maturity in salmon. Nature 528(7582):405–408
4. Bertin A, Fairbairn DJ (2005) One tool, many uses: precopulatory sexual selection on genital morphology in Aquarius remigis. J Evol Biol 18(4):949–961
5. Van der Bijl W, Mank JE (2021) Widespread cryptic variation in genetic architecture between sexes. Evol Lett 5-4:359–369