» Articles » PMID: 36228022

Conflict over Fertilization Underlies the Transient Evolution of Reinforcement

Overview
Journal PLoS Biol
Specialty Biology
Date 2022 Oct 13
PMID 36228022
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

When two species meet in secondary contact, the production of low fitness hybrids may be prevented by the adaptive evolution of increased prezygotic isolation, a process known as reinforcement. Theoretical challenges to the evolution of reinforcement are generally cast as a coordination problem, i.e., "how can statistical associations between traits and preferences be maintained in the face of recombination?" However, the evolution of reinforcement also poses a potential conflict between mates. For example, the opportunity costs to hybridization may differ between the sexes or species. This is particularly likely for reinforcement based on postmating prezygotic (PMPZ) incompatibilities, as the ability to fertilize both conspecific and heterospecific eggs is beneficial to male gametes, but heterospecific mating may incur a cost for female gametes. We develop a population genetic model of interspecific conflict over reinforcement inspired by "gametophytic factors", which act as PMPZ barriers among Zea mays subspecies. We demonstrate that this conflict results in the transient evolution of reinforcement-after females adaptively evolve to reject gametes lacking a signal common in conspecific gametes, this gamete signal adaptively introgresses into the other population. Ultimately, the male gamete signal fixes in both species, and isolation returns to pre-reinforcement levels. We interpret geographic patterns of isolation among Z. mays subspecies considering these findings and suggest when and how this conflict can be resolved. Our results suggest that sexual conflict over fertilization may pose an understudied obstacle to the evolution of reinforcement.

Citing Articles

Early-acting inbreeding depression can evolve as an inbreeding avoidance mechanism.

Brandvain Y, Thomson L, Pyhajarvi T Proc Biol Sci. 2024; 291(2018):20232467.

PMID: 38444336 PMC: 10921365. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2023.2467.


Strong postmating reproductive isolation in Mimulus section Eunanus.

Farnitano M, Sweigart A J Evol Biol. 2023; 36(10):1393-1410.

PMID: 37691442 PMC: 10592011. DOI: 10.1111/jeb.14219.


The coevolutionary dynamics of cryptic female choice.

Kustra M, Alonzo S Evol Lett. 2023; 7(4):191-202.

PMID: 37475752 PMC: 10355280. DOI: 10.1093/evlett/qrad025.


Conflict over fertilization underlies the transient evolution of reinforcement.

Rushworth C, Wardlaw A, Ross-Ibarra J, Brandvain Y PLoS Biol. 2022; 20(10):e3001814.

PMID: 36228022 PMC: 9560609. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3001814.


Assortative mating enhances postzygotic barriers to gene flow via ancestry bundling.

Muralidhar P, Coop G, Veller C Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2022; 119(30):e2122179119.

PMID: 35858444 PMC: 9335313. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2122179119.

References
1.
Servedio M . Male versus female mate choice: sexual selection and the evolution of species recognition via reinforcement. Evolution. 2007; 61(12):2772-89. DOI: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2007.00247.x. View

2.
MANGELSDORF P, JONES D . The Expression of Mendelian Factors in the Gametophyte of Maize. Genetics. 1926; 11(5):423-55. PMC: 1200910. DOI: 10.1093/genetics/11.5.423. View

3.
Moyle L, Olson M, Tiffin P . Patterns of reproductive isolation in three angiosperm genera. Evolution. 2004; 58(6):1195-208. DOI: 10.1111/j.0014-3820.2004.tb01700.x. View

4.
Turissini D, Matute D . Fine scale mapping of genomic introgressions within the Drosophila yakuba clade. PLoS Genet. 2017; 13(9):e1006971. PMC: 5600410. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1006971. View

5.
Stein A, Uy J . Unidirectional introgression of a sexually selected trait across an avian hybrid zone: a role for female choice?. Evolution. 2006; 60(7):1476-85. View