Recombination and Sexual Selection

封面

如何引用文章

全文:

开放存取 开放存取
受限制的访问 ##reader.subscriptionAccessGranted##
受限制的访问 订阅或者付费存取

详细

Differences in recombination between males and females are well-known. There are many theories about the origin and evolution of these differences. In this article, we consider some of these theories and try to test one of them, the hypothesis of sexual selection. We examine recombination rate in the barn swallow and pale martin. These two swallow species are quite closely related and similar in lifestyle, but differ in sexual dimorphism. It is well-pronounced in the barn swallow, while it is almost impossible to distinguish males from females in the pale martin. The general level of recombination in female barn swallows is 13.5% higher than in males, while such sex differences are insignificant in the pale martin. It is likely that in the common ancestor of these two swallow species, males and females were similar both in morphology and in the recombination level. Then, sexual selection in barn swallows resulted in the sexual dimorphism in both these characters. However, the reason why the recombination increased in females rather than decreased in males is puzzling. Perhaps, it can be explained by the so-called runaway sexual selection.

作者简介

P. Borodin

Institute of Cytology and Genetics, Siberian Branch of RAS; Novosibirsk State University

Email: borodin@bionet.nsc.ru
Novosibirsk, Russia; Novosibirsk, Russia

L. Malinovskaya

Institute of Cytology and Genetics, Siberian Branch of RAS; Novosibirsk State University

Email: malinovskaya@bionet.nsc.ru
Novosibirsk, Russia; Novosibirsk, Russia

E. Schneider

OOO “SibEcocentre”

Email: equ001@gmail.com
Novosibirsk, Russia

А. Torgasheva

Institute of Cytology and Genetics, Siberian Branch of RAS; Novosibirsk State University

Email: torgasheva@bionet.nsc.ru
Novosibirsk, Russia; Novosibirsk, Russia

参考

  1. Геодакян В.А. Эволюционная роль половых хромосом (новая концепция). Генетика. 1998; 34(8): 1171–1184.
  2. Haldane J.B.S. Sex-ratio and unisexual sterility in hybrid animals. J. Genet. 1922; 12: 101–109. doi: 10.1007/BF02983075.
  3. Huxley J.S. Sexual difference of linkage in Gammarus chevreuxi. J. Genet. 1928; 20: 145–156. doi: 10.1007/BF02983136.
  4. Bishop D.K., Zickler D. Early decision; meiotic crossover interference prior to stable strand exchange and synapsis. Cell. 2004; 117(1): 9–15. doi: 10.1016/s0092-8674(04)00297-1.
  5. Sardell J.M., Kirkpatrick M. Sex differences in the recombination landscape. Am. Nat. 2020; 195: 361–379. doi: 10.1086/704943.
  6. Миллер Дж. Соблазняющий разум: Как выбор сексуального партнера повлиял на эволюцию человеческой природы. М., 2020.
  7. Fisher R.A. The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection. Oxford, 1930.
  8. Trivers R. Sex Differences in Rates of Recombination and Sexual Selection. The Evolution of Sex: an Examination of Current Ideas. Michod R.E. and B. R. Levin (eds). Sunderland, 1988; 270–286.
  9. Mank J.E. The evolution of heterochiasmy: The role of sexual selection and sperm competition in determining sex-specific recombination rates in eutherian mammals. Genet. Res. 2009; 91: 355–363. doi: 10.1017/S0016672309990255.
  10. Malinovskaya L.P., Tishakova K., Shnaider E.P., Borodin P.M., Torgasheva A.A. Heterochiasmy and sexual dimorphism: The case of the barn swallow (Hirundo rustica, Hirundinidae, aves). Genes (Basel). 2020; 11(10): 1119. doi: 10.3390/genes11101119.
  11. Møller A.P. Sexual Selection and the Barn Swallow. Oxford, 1994.

补充文件

附件文件
动作
1. JATS XML

版权所有 © Издательство «Наука», 2020

##common.cookie##