Display options
Cite
Frasier TR, Gillett RM, Hamilton PK, et al. Postcopulatory selection for dissimilar gametes maintains heterozygosity in the endangered North Atlantic right whale. Ecol Evol. 2013;3(10):3483-94doi: 10.1002/ece3.738.
Frasier, T. R., Gillett, R. M., Hamilton, P. K., Brown, M. W., Kraus, S. D., & White, B. N. (2013). Postcopulatory selection for dissimilar gametes maintains heterozygosity in the endangered North Atlantic right whale. Ecology and evolution, 3(10), 3483-94. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.738
Frasier, T R, et al. "Postcopulatory selection for dissimilar gametes maintains heterozygosity in the endangered North Atlantic right whale." Ecology and evolution vol. 3,10 (2013): 3483-94. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.738
Frasier TR, Gillett RM, Hamilton PK, Brown MW, Kraus SD, White BN. Postcopulatory selection for dissimilar gametes maintains heterozygosity in the endangered North Atlantic right whale. Ecol Evol. 2013 Sep;3(10):3483-94. doi: 10.1002/ece3.738. Epub 2013 Aug 28. PMID: 24223284; PMCID: PMC3797493.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Ecol Evol. 2013 Sep;3(10):3483-94. doi: 10.1002/ece3.738. Epub 2013 Aug 28.

Postcopulatory selection for dissimilar gametes maintains heterozygosity in the endangered North Atlantic right whale.

Ecology and evolution

T R Frasier, R M Gillett, P K Hamilton, M W Brown, S D Kraus, B N White

Affiliations

  1. Department of Biology and Forensic Sciences Program, Saint Mary's University 923 Robie Street, Halifax, Nova Scotia, B3H 3C3, Canada.

PMID: 24223284 PMCID: PMC3797493 DOI: 10.1002/ece3.738

Abstract

Although small populations are expected to lose genetic diversity through genetic drift and inbreeding, a number of mechanisms exist that could minimize this genetic decline. Examples include mate choice for unrelated mates and fertilization patterns biased toward genetically dissimilar gametes. Both processes have been widely documented, but the long-term implications have received little attention. Here, we combined over 25 years of field data with high-resolution genetic data to assess the long-term impacts of biased fertilization patterns in the endangered North Atlantic right whale. Offspring have higher levels of microsatellite heterozygosity than expected from this gene pool (effect size = 0.326, P < 0.011). This pattern is not due to precopulatory mate choice for genetically dissimilar mates (P < 0.600), but instead results from postcopulatory selection for gametes that are genetically dissimilar (effect size = 0.37, P < 0.003). The long-term implication is that heterozygosity has slowly increased in calves born throughout the study period, as opposed to the slight decline that was expected. Therefore, this mechanism represents a natural means through which small populations can mitigate the loss of genetic diversity over time.

Keywords: Genetic incompatibility; genetic variation; mate choice; mate incompatibility; right whale

References

  1. Mol Ecol. 2009 May;18(9):2010-21 - PubMed
  2. Evolution. 1999 Aug;53(4):1259-1267 - PubMed
  3. Genetics. 1931 Mar;16(2):97-159 - PubMed
  4. Trends Ecol Evol. 1996 May;11(5):201-6 - PubMed
  5. Dev Biol. 1984 Sep;105(1):188-95 - PubMed
  6. Mol Ecol. 2001 Jan;10(1):249-56 - PubMed
  7. Hum Hered. 1993 Jan-Feb;43(1):45-52 - PubMed
  8. Mol Ecol. 2004 Feb;13(2):443-7 - PubMed
  9. PLoS One. 2006 Dec 20;1:e72 - PubMed
  10. Genetics. 1999 Aug;152(4):1753-66 - PubMed
  11. Am Nat. 1999 Feb;153(2):145-164 - PubMed
  12. Evolution. 2005 Jan;59(1):106-12 - PubMed
  13. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004 Oct 19;101(42):15261-4 - PubMed
  14. Nature. 2007 Feb 22;445(7130):912-4 - PubMed
  15. Mol Ecol Resour. 2008 Nov;8(6):1263-6 - PubMed
  16. Mol Ecol. 2007 Dec;16(24):5277-93 - PubMed
  17. Nat Rev Genet. 2002 Apr;3(4):262-73 - PubMed
  18. Proc Biol Sci. 2001 Oct 7;268(1480):2021-7 - PubMed
  19. Mol Biol Evol. 2010 Jun;27(6):1235-46 - PubMed
  20. Environ Res. 2012 Jan;112:67-76 - PubMed
  21. Mol Ecol. 2009 Aug;18(15):3307-15 - PubMed
  22. Evolution. 1997 Oct;51(5):1684-1688 - PubMed
  23. Mol Ecol. 2006 Dec;15(14):4659-65 - PubMed
  24. Trends Ecol Evol. 2004 Oct;19(10):554-9 - PubMed
  25. Proc Biol Sci. 2008 Mar 22;275(1635):703-11 - PubMed
  26. Heredity (Edinb). 2008 Aug;101(2):145-55 - PubMed
  27. Hum Reprod. 1998 Jan;13(1):33-8 - PubMed
  28. Heredity (Edinb). 1998 Aug;81 ( Pt 2):127-33 - PubMed
  29. Nat Genet. 2002 Feb;30(2):175-9 - PubMed
  30. Genetics. 2000 Aug;155(4):1981-90 - PubMed
  31. Science. 1998 Nov 27;282(5394):1695-8 - PubMed
  32. Evolution. 2008 Apr;62(4):879-86 - PubMed
  33. Biol Reprod. 1999 Dec;61(6):1381-6 - PubMed
  34. Mol Ecol. 1994 Oct;3(5):489-95 - PubMed
  35. Mol Ecol. 2002 Dec;11(12):2467-74 - PubMed
  36. Nat Rev Genet. 2004 Jun;5(6):435-45 - PubMed
  37. Heredity (Edinb). 2008 Jun;100(6):587-93 - PubMed
  38. Nat Rev Immunol. 2005 Mar;5(3):201-14 - PubMed
  39. Science. 2005 Jul 22;309(5734):561-2 - PubMed
  40. Proc Biol Sci. 1995 Jun 22;260(1359):245-9 - PubMed
  41. Mol Ecol. 2000 Aug;9(8):1013-27 - PubMed
  42. Evolution. 2004 Feb;58(2):416-20 - PubMed
  43. Mol Ecol. 2010 May;19(9):1898-913 - PubMed
  44. Nature. 2001 May 10;411(6834):199-204 - PubMed
  45. Mol Ecol. 1998 May;7(5):639-55 - PubMed

Publication Types