Fitness Benefits of Mate Choice for Compatibility in a Socially Monogamous Species.
Fitness Benefits of Mate Choice for Compatibility in a Socially Monogamous Species.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1371/journal.pbio.1002248
复制
发表时间：
2015
期刊：
影响因子：
9.8
通讯作者：
Forstmeier W
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Ihle M;Kempenaers B;Forstmeier W
关于配偶选择的研究主要集中在对质量指标的偏好上，假设所有人都对谁最有吸引力有共识。然而，在一些物种中，交配偏好似乎主要是针对个体的，这表明它们可能针对遗传或行为兼容性。很少有研究量化了允许和阻止这种特殊的配偶选择对健康的影响。在这里，我们报告了一项控制整体伴侣质量变化的实验，结果表明，自由择偶产生的斑胸草雀（Taeniopygia guttata）配对的繁殖成功率比被迫交配的配对高37%。新产卵的交叉饲养表明，胚胎（孵化前）的死亡率主要取决于遗传亲本的身份，而在饲养期间的后代死亡率则取决于养父母的身份。因此，如果配偶选择的目标是遗传兼容性（为了胚胎生存能力），阻止配偶选择将导致胚胎死亡率的增加；如果配偶选择的目标是行为兼容性（为了更好的养育），则会导致后代死亡率的增加。我们发现，两种处理的成对胚胎死亡率相同，但被选中的成对在抚养后代方面做得更好。因此，这些结果支持了行为相容假说，而不是基因相容假说。进一步的探索性分析揭示了“自由选择”和“强迫”配对在行为和适合度方面的一些差异。一项对斑胸草雀的研究表明，自由选择配偶比强迫配对更适合交配，这是由于行为上的而非基因上的兼容性增强了。阅读摘要。在过去的半个世纪里，人们对配偶选择和使个体吸引他人的特征进化的研究产生了极大的兴趣。然而，在某些物种中，个体在他们认为有吸引力的人身上可能存在很大差异，这种差异通常被解释为“为了兼容性而选择配偶”。在这里，我们量化了这种配偶选择对社会一夫一妻制雀形目鸟类——斑胸草雀的好处。我们发现，由自由选择配偶产生的配对比被迫与随机分配的个体交配的配对的繁殖成功率高37%。被迫配对的卵受精率更高，孵化出的后代死亡率也更高。在雌性中，我们观察到与指定伴侣交配的意愿降低，而强制配对的雄性表现出较少的亲代照顾，并增加了向额外配对的雌性求爱的活动。这些发现支持了斑胸草雀根据行为兼容性选择配偶的假设。相比之下，斑胸草雀似乎还没有进化出一种机制，可以让它们选择一个可以将胚胎死亡率降到最低的伴侣。这反驳了基于基因相容性的配偶选择。
Research on mate choice has primarily focused on preferences for quality indicators, assuming that all individuals show consensus about who is the most attractive. However, in some species, mating preferences seem largely individual-specific, suggesting that they might target genetic or behavioral compatibility. Few studies have quantified the fitness consequences of allowing versus preventing such idiosyncratic mate choice. Here, we report on an experiment that controls for variation in overall partner quality and show that zebra finch (Taeniopygia guttata) pairs that resulted from free mate choice achieved a 37% higher reproductive success than pairs that were forced to mate. Cross-fostering of freshly laid eggs showed that embryo mortality (before hatching) primarily depended on the identity of the genetic parents, whereas offspring mortality during the rearing period depended on foster-parent identity. Therefore, preventing mate choice should lead to an increase in embryo mortality if mate choice targets genetic compatibility (for embryo viability), and to an increase in offspring mortality if mate choice targets behavioral compatibility (for better rearing). We found that pairs from both treatments showed equal rates of embryo mortality, but chosen pairs were better at raising offspring. These results thus support the behavioral, but not the genetic, compatibility hypothesis. Further exploratory analyses reveal several differences in behavior and fitness components between “free-choice” and “forced” pairs. A study of zebra finches shows that free mate choice leads to higher fitness than forced pairings due to increased behavioral, rather than genetic, compatibility. Read the Synopsis. The last half century has seen a tremendous interest in the study of mate choice and the evolution of traits that make individuals attractive to others. In some species, however, individuals can differ substantially in who they find attractive, and this variation has typically been interpreted as “mate choice for compatibility.” Here, we quantify the benefits of such mate choice in a socially monogamous passerine bird, the zebra finch. We found that pairs that resulted from free mate choice achieved a 37% higher reproductive success than pairs that were forced to mate with a randomly assigned individual. Forced pairs suffered from increased failure to fertilize eggs and from increased mortality of hatched offspring. In females, we observed a reduced readiness to copulate with the assigned partner, while males that were force‐paired showed reduced parental care and increased activity in courting extra‐pair females. These findings support the hypothesis that zebra finches choose mates on the basis of behavioral compatibility. In contrast, it appears that zebra finches have not evolved a mechanism that would allow them to select a partner with whom they could minimize the rate of embryo mortality. This argues against mate choice for genetic compatibility.