Section: Evolutionary Biology
Topic: Evolution, Genetics/Genomics, Population biology

A demogenetic individual based model for the evolution of traits and genome architecture under sexual selection

Chevalier, Louise1; De Coligny, François2; Labonne, Jacques1  
1 Université de Pau et des Pays de l’Adour, E2S UPPA, INRAE, ECOBIOP, Saint-Pee-sur-Nivelle, France
2 AMAP, Univ Montpellier, CIRAD, CNRS, INRAE, IRD, 34000 Montpellier, France

Corresponding author(s): Labonne, Jacques (jacques.labonne@inrae.fr)

10.24072/pcjournal.83 - Peer Community Journal, Volume 2 (2022), article no. e8.

Get full text PDF Peer reviewed and recommended by PCI
article image
Sexual selection has long been known to favor the evolution of mating behaviors such as mate preference and competitiveness, and to affect their genetic architecture, for instance by favoring genetic correlation between some traits. Reciprocally, genetic architecture can affect the expression and the evolvability of traits and mating behaviors. But sexual selection is highly context-dependent, making interactions between individuals a central process in evolution, governing the transmission of genotypes to the next generation. This loop between the genetic structure conditioning the expression and evolution of traits and behaviour, and the feedback of this phenotypic evolution on the architecture of the genome in the dynamic context of sexual selection, has yet to be thoroughly investigated. We argue that demogenetic agent-based models (DG-ABM) are especially suited to tackle such a challenge because they allow explicit modelling of both the genetic architecture of traits and the behavioural interactions in a dynamic population context. We here present a DG-ABM able to simultaneously track individual variation in traits (such as gametic investment, preference, competitiveness), fitness and genetic architecture throughout evolution. Using two simulation experiments, we compare various mating systems and show that behavioral interactions during mating triggered some complex feedback in our model, between fitness, population demography, and genetic architecture, placing interactions between individuals at the core of evolution through sexual selection. DG-ABMs can, therefore, relate to theoretical patterns expected at the population level from simpler analytical models in evolutionary biology, and at the same time provide a more comprehensive framework regarding individual trait and behaviour variation, that is usually envisioned separately from genome architecture in behavioural ecology.
Published online:
DOI: 10.24072/pcjournal.83
Type: Research article

Chevalier, Louise 1; De Coligny, François 2; Labonne, Jacques 1

1 Université de Pau et des Pays de l’Adour, E2S UPPA, INRAE, ECOBIOP, Saint-Pee-sur-Nivelle, France
2 AMAP, Univ Montpellier, CIRAD, CNRS, INRAE, IRD, 34000 Montpellier, France
License: CC-BY 4.0
Copyrights: The authors retain unrestricted copyrights and publishing rights 
@article{10_24072_pcjournal_83,
     author = {Chevalier, Louise and De Coligny, Fran\c{c}ois and Labonne, Jacques},
     title = {A demogenetic individual based model for the evolution of traits and genome architecture under sexual selection},
     journal = {Peer Community Journal},
     eid = {e8},
     publisher = {Peer Community In},
     volume = {2},
     year = {2022},
     doi = {10.24072/pcjournal.83},
     url = {https://peercommunityjournal.org/articles/10.24072/pcjournal.83/}
}
TY  - JOUR
AU  - Chevalier, Louise
AU  - De Coligny, François
AU  - Labonne, Jacques
TI  - A demogenetic individual based model for the evolution of traits and genome architecture under sexual selection
JO  - Peer Community Journal
PY  - 2022
VL  - 2
PB  - Peer Community In
UR  - https://peercommunityjournal.org/articles/10.24072/pcjournal.83/
DO  - 10.24072/pcjournal.83
ID  - 10_24072_pcjournal_83
ER  - 
%0 Journal Article
%A Chevalier, Louise
%A De Coligny, François
%A Labonne, Jacques
%T A demogenetic individual based model for the evolution of traits and genome architecture under sexual selection
%J Peer Community Journal
%D 2022
%V 2
%I Peer Community In
%U https://peercommunityjournal.org/articles/10.24072/pcjournal.83/
%R 10.24072/pcjournal.83
%F 10_24072_pcjournal_83
Chevalier, Louise; De Coligny, François; Labonne, Jacques. A demogenetic individual based model for the evolution of traits and genome architecture under sexual selection. Peer Community Journal, Volume 2 (2022), article  no. e8. doi : 10.24072/pcjournal.83. https://peercommunityjournal.org/articles/10.24072/pcjournal.83/

PCI peer reviews and recommendation, and links to data, scripts, code and supplementary information: 10.24072/pci.evolbiol.100112

Conflict of interest of the recommender and peer reviewers:
The recommender in charge of the evaluation of the article and the reviewers declared that they have no conflict of interest (as defined in the code of conduct of PCI) with the authors or with the content of the article.

[1] Adler, G. H. Spacing patterns and social mating systems of echimyid rodents, Journal of Mammalogy, Volume 92 (2011) no. 1, pp. 31-38 | DOI

[2] Aguilée, R.; Claessen, D.; Lambert, A. Adaptive radiation driven by the interplay of eco-evolutionary and landscape dynamics, Evolution (2012), pp. 1291-1306 | DOI

[3] Alcock, J. Mate-locating behavior of Xylocopa californica arizonensis Cresson (Hymenoptera: Anthophoridae), Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society (1991), pp. 349-356

[4] Bailey, N. W.; Moore, A. J. Runaway sexual selection without genetic correlations: social environments and flexible mate choice initiate and enhance the fisher process, Evolution, Volume 66 (2012) no. 9, pp. 2674-2684 | DOI

[5] Barton, N. H.; Charlesworth, B. Genetic Revolutions, Founder Effects, and Speciation, Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, Volume 15 (1984) no. 1, pp. 133-164 | DOI

[6] Bengston, S. E.; Dahan, R. A.; Donaldson, Z.; Phelps, S. M.; van Oers, K.; Sih, A.; Bell, A. M. Genomic tools for behavioural ecologists to understand repeatable individual differences in behaviour, Nature Ecology & Evolution, Volume 2 (2018) no. 6, pp. 944-955 | DOI

[7] Bolnick, D. I.; Barrett, R. D.; Oke, K. B.; Rennison, D. J.; Stuart, Y. E. (Non)Parallel Evolution, Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, Volume 49 (2018) no. 1, pp. 303-330 | DOI

[8] Bonduriansky, R.; Chenoweth, S. F. Intralocus sexual conflict, Trends in Ecology & Evolution, Volume 24 (2009) no. 5, pp. 280-288 | DOI

[9] Byers, J. A.; Wiseman, P. A.; Jones, L.; Roffe, T. J. A Large Cost of Female Mate Sampling in Pronghorn, The American Naturalist, Volume 166 (2005) no. 6, pp. 661-668 | DOI

[10] Chapman, T.; Arnqvist, G.; Bangham, J.; Rowe, L. Sexual conflict, Trends in Ecology & Evolution, Volume 18 (2003) no. 1, pp. 41-47 | DOI

[11] Charlesworth, D.; Wright, S. I. Breeding systems and genome evolution, Current Opinion in Genetics & Development, Volume 11 (2001) no. 6, pp. 685-690 | DOI

[12] Chevalier L; Labonne J; De Coligny F, 2020 | DOI

[13] Cheverud, J. M. Developmental Integration and the Evolution of Pleiotropy, American Zoologist, Volume 36 (1996) no. 1, pp. 44-50 | DOI

[14] Connallon, T. The geography of sex-specific selection, local adaptation, and sexual dimorphism, Evolution, Volume 69 (2015) no. 9, pp. 2333-2344 | DOI

[15] Darwin C The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex. , 2, D. Appleton., 1872 | DOI

[16] De Jong, M. C. M.; Sabelis, M. W. Limits to runaway sexual selection: The wallflower paradox, Journal of Evolutionary Biology, Volume 4 (1991) no. 4, pp. 637-655 | DOI

[17] DeAngelis, D. L.; Mooij, W. M. Individual-Based Modeling of Ecological and Evolutionary Processes, Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, Volume 36 (2005) no. 1, pp. 147-168 | DOI

[18] Deb, R.; Balakrishnan, R. The opportunity for sampling: the ecological context of female mate choice, Behavioral Ecology, Volume 25 (2014) no. 4, pp. 967-974 | DOI

[19] Débarre, F.; Otto, S. P. Evolutionary dynamics of a quantitative trait in a finite asexual population, Theoretical Population Biology, Volume 108 (2016), pp. 75-88 | DOI

[20] Dechaume-Moncharmont, F.-X.; Brom, T.; Cézilly, F. Opportunity costs resulting from scramble competition within the choosy sex severely impair mate choosiness, Animal Behaviour, Volume 114 (2016), pp. 249-260 | DOI

[21] Emlen, S. T.; Oring, L. W. Ecology, Sexual Selection, and the Evolution of Mating Systems, Science, Volume 197 (1977) no. 4300, pp. 215-223 | DOI

[22] Frankham, R. Introduction to quantitative genetics (4th edn): by Douglas S. Falconer and Trudy F.C. Mackay Longman, 1996. £24.99 pbk (xv and 464 pages) ISBN 0582 24302 5, Trends in Genetics, Volume 12 (1996) no. 7 | DOI

[23] Fawcett, T. W.; McNamara, J. M.; Houston, A. I. When is it adaptive to be patient? A general framework for evaluating delayed rewards, Behavioural Processes, Volume 89 (2012) no. 2, pp. 128-136 | DOI

[24] Fisher, R. The evolution of sexual preference, The Eugenics review, Volume 7 (1915) no. 3, pp. 184-192

[25] Fisher, R. The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection, Oxford Univ. Press , (Clarendon), London (Reprinted and revised, 1958), 1930

[26] Fromhage, L.; Jennions, M. D. Coevolution of parental investment and sexually selected traits drives sex-role divergence, Nature Communications, Volume 7 (2016) no. 1 | DOI

[27] Gibson, J. R.; Chippindale, A. K.; Rice, W. R. The X chromosome is a hot spot for sexually antagonistic fitness variation, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, Volume 269 (2002) no. 1490, pp. 499-505 | DOI

[28] Gimelfarb, A. Processes of pair formation leading to assortative mating in biological populations: encounter-mating model, The American naturalist, Volume 131 (1988), pp. 865-884 | DOI

[29] Gingerich, P. D. Rates of Evolution, Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, Volume 40 (2009) no. 1, pp. 657-675 | DOI

[30] Grimm, V.; Berger, U.; Bastiansen, F.; Eliassen, S.; Ginot, V.; Giske, J.; Goss-Custard, J.; Grand, T.; Heinz, S. K.; Huse, G.; Huth, A.; Jepsen, J. U.; Jørgensen, C.; Mooij, W. M.; Müller, B.; Pe’er, G.; Piou, C.; Railsback, S. F.; Robbins, A. M.; Robbins, M. M.; Rossmanith, E.; Rüger, N.; Strand, E.; Souissi, S.; Stillman, R. A.; Vabø, R.; Visser, U.; DeAngelis, D. L. A standard protocol for describing individual-based and agent-based models, Ecological Modelling, Volume 198 (2006) no. 1-2, pp. 115-126 | DOI

[31] Guillaume, F.; Otto, S. P. Gene Functional Trade-Offs and the Evolution of Pleiotropy, Genetics, Volume 192 (2012) no. 4, pp. 1389-1409 | DOI

[32] Guillaume, F.; Rougemont, J. Nemo: an evolutionary and population genetics programming framework, Bioinformatics, Volume 22 (2006) no. 20, pp. 2556-2557 | DOI

[33] Haldane, J. B. S. The rate of spontaneous mutation of a human gene, Journal of Genetics, Volume 31 (1935) no. 3, pp. 317-326 | DOI

[34] Hall, D. W.; Kirkpatrick, M.; West, B. RUNAWAY SEXUAL SELECTION WHEN FEMALE PREFERENCES ARE DIRECTLY SELECTED, Evolution, Volume 54 (2000) no. 6 | DOI

[35] Hammer, M. F.; Mendez, F. L.; Cox, M. P.; Woerner, A. E.; Wall, J. D. Sex-Biased Evolutionary Forces Shape Genomic Patterns of Human Diversity, PLoS Genetics, Volume 4 (2008) no. 9 | DOI

[36] Hansen, T. F. Is modularity necessary for evolvability?, Biosystems, Volume 69 (2003) no. 2-3, pp. 83-94 | DOI

[37] Hendry, A. P.; Kinnison, M. T. Perspective: The Pace of Modern Life: Measuring Rates of Contemporary Microevolution, Evolution, Volume 53 (1999) no. 6 | DOI

[38] Hill, W. G.; Zhang, X.-S. On the Pleiotropic Structure of the Genotype–Phenotype Map and the Evolvability of Complex Organisms, Genetics, Volume 190 (2012) no. 3, pp. 1131-1137 | DOI

[39] Holt, R. D.; Barfield, M. Theoretical Perspectives on the Statics and Dynamics of Species’ Borders in Patchy Environments, The American Naturalist, Volume 178 (2011) no. S1 | DOI

[40] Iwasa, Y.; Pomiankowski, A. Continual change in mate preferences, Nature, Volume 377 (1995) no. 6548, pp. 420-422 | DOI

[41] Iwasa, Y.; Pomiankowski, A.; Nee, S. The Evolution of Costly Mate Preferences II. The 'Handicap' Principle, Evolution, Volume 45 (1991) no. 6 | DOI

[42] Janetos, A. C. Strategies of female mate choice: A theoretical analysis, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, Volume 7 (1980) no. 2, pp. 107-112 | DOI

[43] Jones, A. G.; Arnold, S. J.; Bürger, R. Stability of the G-matrix in a population experiencing pleiotropic mutation, stabilizing selection, and genetic drift, Evolution, Volume 57 (2003) no. 8, pp. 1747-1760 | DOI

[44] Jones, A. G.; Bürger, R.; Arnold, S. J. Epistasis and natural selection shape the mutational architecture of complex traits, Nature Communications, Volume 5 (2014) no. 1, pp. 1-10 | DOI

[45] Jones, A. G.; Ratterman, N. L. Mate choice and sexual selection: What have we learned since Darwin?, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Volume 106 (2009) no. Supplement_1, pp. 10001-10008 | DOI

[46] Karim, N.; Gordon, S. P.; Schwartz, A. K.; Hendry, A. P. This isnotdéjà vu all over again: male guppy colour in a new experimental introduction, Journal of Evolutionary Biology, Volume 20 (2007) no. 4, pp. 1339-1350 | DOI

[47] Kent, C.; Azanchi, R.; Smith, B.; Formosa, A.; Levine, J. D. Social Context Influences Chemical Communication in D. melanogaster Males, Current Biology, Volume 18 (2008) no. 18, pp. 1384-1389 | DOI

[48] Kirkpatrick, M.; Barton, N. H. Evolution of a Species' Range, The American Naturalist, Volume 150 (1997) no. 1, pp. 1-23 | DOI

[49] Kokko, H.; Booksmythe, I.; Jennions, M. D. Mate-sampling costs and sexy sons, Journal of Evolutionary Biology, Volume 28 (2015) no. 1, pp. 259-266 | DOI

[50] Kokko, H.; Jennions, M. D. Parental investment, sexual selection and sex ratios, Journal of Evolutionary Biology, Volume 21 (2008) no. 4, pp. 919-948 | DOI

[51] Kokko, H.; Rankin, D. J. Lonely hearts or sex in the city? Density-dependent effects in mating systems, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, Volume 361 (2006) no. 1466, pp. 319-334 | DOI

[52] Krupp, J. J.; Kent, C.; Billeter, J.-C.; Azanchi, R.; So, A. K.-C.; Schonfeld, J. A.; Smith, B. P.; Lucas, C.; Levine, J. D. Social Experience Modifies Pheromone Expression and Mating Behavior in Male Drosophila melanogaster, Current Biology, Volume 18 (2008) no. 18, pp. 1373-1383 | DOI

[53] Labonne, J.; Hendry, A. P. Natural and Sexual Selection Giveth and Taketh Away Reproductive Barriers: Models of Population Divergence in Guppies, The American Naturalist, Volume 176 (2010) no. 1, pp. 26-39 | DOI

[54] Labonne, J.; Ravigné, V.; Parisi, B.; Gaucherel, C. Linking dendritic network structures to population demogenetics: The downside of connectivity, Oikos, Volume 117 (2008) no. 10, pp. 1479-1490 | DOI

[55] Lamichhaney, S.; Fan, G.; Widemo, F.; Gunnarsson, U.; Thalmann, D. S.; Hoeppner, M. P.; Kerje, S.; Gustafson, U.; Shi, C.; Zhang, H.; Chen, W.; Liang, X.; Huang, L.; Wang, J.; Liang, E.; Wu, Q.; Lee, S. M.-Y.; Xu, X.; Höglund, J.; Liu, X.; Andersson, L. Structural genomic changes underlie alternative reproductive strategies in the ruff (Philomachus pugnax), Nature Genetics, Volume 48 (2016) no. 1, pp. 84-88 | DOI

[56] Lande, R. Natural Selection and Random Genetic Drift in Phenotypic Evolution, Evolution, Volume 30 (1976) no. 2, pp. 314-334 | DOI

[57] Lande, R. The genetic covariance between characters maintained by pleiotropic mutations, Genetics, Volume 94 (1980) no. 1, pp. 203-215 | DOI

[58] Lande, R. Models of speciation by sexual selection on polygenic traits, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Volume 78 (1981) no. 6, pp. 3721-3725 | DOI

[59] Lande, R.; Arnold, S. J. Evolution of mating preference and sexual dimorphism, Journal of Theoretical Biology, Volume 117 (1985) no. 4, pp. 651-664 | DOI

[60] Lehtonen, J.; Jennions, M. D.; Kokko, H. The many costs of sex, Trends in Ecology & Evolution, Volume 27 (2012) no. 3, pp. 172-178 | DOI

[61] Lehtonen, J.; Parker, G. A.; Schärer, L. Why anisogamy drives ancestral sex roles, Evolution, Volume 70 (2016) no. 5, pp. 1129-1135 | DOI

[62] Lorch PD; Proulx S; Rowe L; Day T Condition-dependent sexual selection can accelerate adaptation, Evolutionary Ecology Research, Volume 5 (2003), pp. 867-881

[63] Lynch, M. Evolution of the mutation rate, Trends in Genetics, Volume 26 (2010) no. 8, pp. 345-352 | DOI

[64] Matessi, C.; Di Pasquale, C. Long-term evolution of multilocus traits, Journal of Mathematical Biology, Volume 34 (1996) no. 5-6, pp. 613-653 | DOI

[65] Matuszewski, S.; Hermisson, J.; Kopp, M. Fisher's geometric model with a moving optimum, Evolution, Volume 68 (2014) no. 9, pp. 2571-2588 | DOI

[66] Mead, L. S.; Arnold, S. J. Quantitative genetic models of sexual selection, Trends in Ecology & Evolution, Volume 19 (2004) no. 5, pp. 264-271 | DOI

[67] Misevic, D.; Ofria, C.; Lenski, R. E. Sexual reproduction reshapes the genetic architecture of digital organisms, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, Volume 273 (2006) no. 1585, pp. 457-464 | DOI

[68] Moore, A. J.; Brodie, E. D.; Wolf, J. B. Interacting Phenotypes and the Evolutionary Process: I. Direct and Indirect Genetic Effects of Social Interactions, Evolution, Volume 51 (1997) no. 5, pp. 1352-1362 | DOI

[69] Muniz, D. G.; Machado, G. Mate sampling influences the intensity of sexual selection and the evolution of costly sexual ornaments, Journal of Theoretical Biology, Volume 447 (2018), pp. 74-83 | DOI

[70] Nachman, M. W.; Crowell, S. L. Estimate of the Mutation Rate per Nucleotide in Humans, Genetics, Volume 156 (2000) no. 1, pp. 297-304 | DOI

[71] Neuenschwander, S.; Hospital, F.; Guillaume, F.; Goudet, J. quantiNemo: an individual-based program to simulate quantitative traits with explicit genetic architecture in a dynamic metapopulation, Bioinformatics, Volume 24 (2008) no. 13, pp. 1552-1553 | DOI

[72] Oddou‐Muratorio, S.; Davi, H. Simulating local adaptation to climate of forest trees with a Physio‐Demo‐Genetics model, Evolutionary Applications, Volume 7 (2014) no. 4, pp. 453-467 | DOI

[73] Oke, K. B.; Rolshausen, G.; LeBlond, C.; Hendry, A. P. How Parallel Is Parallel Evolution? A Comparative Analysis in Fishes, The American Naturalist, Volume 190 (2017) no. 1, pp. 1-16 | DOI

[74] Otto, S. P.; Servedio, M. R.; Nuismer, S. L. Frequency-Dependent Selection and the Evolution of Assortative Mating, Genetics, Volume 179 (2008) no. 4, pp. 2091-2112 | DOI

[75] Paaby, A. B.; Rockman, M. V. The many faces of pleiotropy, Trends in Genetics, Volume 29 (2013) no. 2, pp. 66-73 | DOI

[76] Parker, G.; Baker, R.; Smith, V. The origin and evolution of gamete dimorphism and the male-female phenomenon, Journal of Theoretical Biology, Volume 36 (1972) no. 3, pp. 529-553 | DOI

[77] Peng, B.; Kimmel, M. simuPOP: a forward-time population genetics simulation environment, Bioinformatics, Volume 21 (2005) no. 18, pp. 3686-3687 | DOI

[78] Pigliucci, M. Is evolvability evolvable?, Nature Reviews Genetics, Volume 9 (2008) no. 1, pp. 75-82 | DOI

[79] Piou, C.; Prévost, E. A demo-genetic individual-based model for Atlantic salmon populations: Model structure, parameterization and sensitivity, Ecological Modelling, Volume 231 (2012), pp. 37-52 | DOI

[80] Plomion, C.; Aury, J.-M.; Amselem, J.; Leroy, T.; Murat, F.; Duplessis, S.; Faye, S.; Francillonne, N.; Labadie, K.; Le Provost, G.; Lesur, I.; Bartholomé, J.; Faivre-Rampant, P.; Kohler, A.; Leplé, J.-C.; Chantret, N.; Chen, J.; Diévart, A.; Alaeitabar, T.; Barbe, V.; Belser, C.; Bergès, H.; Bodénès, C.; Bogeat-Triboulot, M.-B.; Bouffaud, M.-L.; Brachi, B.; Chancerel, E.; Cohen, D.; Couloux, A.; Da Silva, C.; Dossat, C.; Ehrenmann, F.; Gaspin, C.; Grima-Pettenati, J.; Guichoux, E.; Hecker, A.; Herrmann, S.; Hugueney, P.; Hummel, I.; Klopp, C.; Lalanne, C.; Lascoux, M.; Lasserre, E.; Lemainque, A.; Desprez-Loustau, M.-L.; Luyten, I.; Madoui, M.-A.; Mangenot, S.; Marchal, C.; Maumus, F.; Mercier, J.; Michotey, C.; Panaud, O.; Picault, N.; Rouhier, N.; Rué, O.; Rustenholz, C.; Salin, F.; Soler, M.; Tarkka, M.; Velt, A.; Zanne, A. E.; Martin, F.; Wincker, P.; Quesneville, H.; Kremer, A.; Salse, J. Oak genome reveals facets of long lifespan, Nature Plants, Volume 4 (2018) no. 7, pp. 440-452 | DOI

[81] Pomiankowski, A.; Iwasa, Y. Runaway ornament diversity caused by Fisherian sexual selection, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Volume 95 (1998) no. 9, pp. 5106-5111 | DOI

[82] Ramsey, D. M. Mutual Mate Choice with Multiple Criteria, Advances in Dynamic Games, Birkhäuser Boston, Boston, 2011, pp. 337-355 | DOI

[83] Rintamäki, P. T.; Alatalo, R. V.; Höglund, J.; Lundberg, A. Mate sampling behaviour of black grouse females (Tetrao tetrix), Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, Volume 37 (1995) no. 3, pp. 209-215 | DOI

[84] Ritchie, M. G. Sexual Selection and Speciation, Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, Volume 38 (2007) no. 1, pp. 79-102 | DOI

[85] Rittschof, C. C.; Robinson, G. E. Genomics: moving behavioural ecology beyond the phenotypic gambit, Animal Behaviour, Volume 92 (2014), pp. 263-270 | DOI

[86] Roff; Mousseau Does natural selection alter genetic architecture? An evaluation of quantitative genetic variation among populations of Allonemobius socius and A. fasciatus, Journal of Evolutionary Biology, Volume 12 (1999) no. 2, pp. 361-369 | DOI

[87] Romero-Mujalli, D.; Jeltsch, F.; Tiedemann, R. Individual-based modeling of eco-evolutionary dynamics: state of the art and future directions, Regional Environmental Change, Volume 19 (2019) no. 1, pp. 1-12 | DOI

[88] Sasaki, A.; Dieckmann, U. Oligomorphic dynamics for analyzing the quantitative genetics of adaptive speciation, Journal of Mathematical Biology, Volume 63 (2011) no. 4, pp. 601-635 | DOI

[89] Schwartz AK; Hendry AP A test for the parallel co-evolution of male colour and female preference in Trinidadian guppies (Poecilia reticulata), Evolutionary Ecology Research, Volume 9 (2007), pp. 71-90

[90] Shaw, F. H.; Shaw, R. G.; Wilkinson, G. S.; Turelli, M. Changes in Genetic Variances and Covariances: G Whiz!, Evolution, Volume 49 (1995) no. 6, pp. 1260-1267 | DOI

[91] Sinervo, B.; Svensson, E. Correlational selection and the evolution of genomic architecture, Heredity, Volume 89 (2002) no. 5, pp. 329-338 | DOI

[92] Smith M Evolution and the Theory of Games: In situations characterized by conflict of interest, the best strategy to adopt depends on what others are doing, American Scientist, Volume 64 (1976) no. 1, pp. 41-45

[93] Steppan, S. J.; Phillips, P. C.; Houle, D. Comparative quantitative genetics: evolution of the G matrix, Trends in Ecology & Evolution, Volume 17 (2002) no. 7, pp. 320-327 | DOI

[94] Tazzyman, S. J.; Iwasa, Y. Sexual selection can increase the effect of random genetic drift-a quantitative genetic model of polymorphism in Oophaga pumilio, the strawberry poison-dart frog, Evolution, Volume 64 (2010) no. 6, pp. 1719-1728 | DOI

[95] Wakano, J. Y.; Iwasa, Y. Evolutionary Branching in a Finite Population: Deterministic Branching vs. Stochastic Branching, Genetics, Volume 193 (2013) no. 1, pp. 229-241 | DOI

[96] Wakano, J. Y.; Lehmann, L. Evolutionary branching in deme-structured populations, Journal of Theoretical Biology, Volume 351 (2014), pp. 83-95 | DOI

[97] Walsh, B.; Blows, M. W. Abundant Genetic Variation + Strong Selection = Multivariate Genetic Constraints: A Geometric View of Adaptation, Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, Volume 40 (2009) no. 1, pp. 41-59 | DOI

[98] West-Eberhard, M. J. Sexual Selection, Social Competition, and Speciation, The Quarterly Review of Biology, Volume 58 (1983) no. 2, pp. 155-183 | DOI

[99] Wilbur, H. M.; Rudolf, V. H. W. Life‐History Evolution in Uncertain Environments: Bet Hedging in Time, The American Naturalist, Volume 168 (2006) no. 3, pp. 398-411 | DOI

[100] Wilkinson, G. S.; Breden, F.; Mank, J. E.; Ritchie, M. G.; Higginson, A. D.; Radwan, J.; Jaquiery, J.; Salzburger, W.; Arriero, E.; Barribeau, S. M.; Phillips, P. C.; Renn, S. C. P.; Rowe, L. The locus of sexual selection: moving sexual selection studies into the post-genomics era, Journal of Evolutionary Biology, Volume 28 (2015) no. 4, pp. 739-755 | DOI

[101] Wolf, J. B.; Brodie III, E. D.; Moore, A. J. Interacting Phenotypes and the Evolutionary Process. II. Selection Resulting from Social Interactions, The American Naturalist, Volume 153 (1999) no. 3, pp. 254-266 | DOI

Cited by Sources:

block.super