Table of Contents
International Journal of Evolutionary Biology
Volume 2011, Article ID 908735, 9 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.4061/2011/908735
Review Article

The Molecular Evolution of Animal Reproductive Tract Proteins: What Have We Learned from Mating-System Comparisons?

Department of Biology, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, ON, Canada K1S 5B6

Received 24 December 2010; Accepted 23 March 2011

Academic Editor: Alberto Civetta

Copyright © 2011 Alex Wong. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. S. A. Ramm, P. L. Oliver, C. P. Ponting, P. Stockley, and R. D. Emes, “Sexual selection and the adaptive evolution of mammalian ejaculate proteins,” Molecular Biology and Evolution, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 207–219, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. L. M. Turner and H. E. Hoekstra, “Adaptive evolution of fertilization proteins within a genus: variation in ZP2 and ZP3 in deer mice (Peromyscus),” Molecular Biology and Evolution, vol. 23, no. 9, pp. 1656–1669, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. A. Wong, “Testing the effects of mating system variation on rates of molecular evolution in primates,” Evolution, vol. 64, no. 9, pp. 2779–2785, 2010. View at Google Scholar
  4. N. L. Clark and W. J. Swanson, “Pervasive adaptive evolution in primate seminal proteins,” PLoS Genetics, vol. 1, no. 3, article e35, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. W. Haerty, S. Jagadeeshan, R. J. Kulathinal et al., “Evolution in the fast lane: rapidly evolving sex-related genes in Drosophila,” Genetics, vol. 177, no. 3, pp. 1321–1335, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. N. L. Clark, J. Gasper, M. Sekino, S. A. Springer, C. F. Aquadro, and W. J. Swanson, “Coevolution of interacting fertilization proteins,” PLoS Genetics, vol. 5, no. 7, Article ID e1000570, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. N. Takebayashi, P. B. Brewer, ED. Newbigin, and M. K. Uyenoyama, “Patterns of variation within self-incompatibility loci,” Molecular Biology and Evolution, vol. 20, no. 11, pp. 1778–1794, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. K. Sato, T. Nishio, R. Kimura et al., “Coevolution of the S-locus genes SRK, SLG and SP11/SCR in Brassica oleracea and B. rapa,” Genetics, vol. 162, no. 2, pp. 931–940, 2002. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. L. Wik, M. Karlsson, and H. Johannesson, “The evolutionary trajectory of the mating-type (mat) genes in Neurospora relates to reproductive behavior of taxa,” BMC Evolutionary Biology, vol. 8, no. 1, p. 109, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. S. Takayama and A. Isogai, “Self-incompatibility in plants,” Annual Review of Plant Biology, vol. 56, pp. 467–489, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. W. J. Swanson and V. D. Vacquier, “The rapid evolution of reproductive proteins,” Nature Reviews Genetics, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 137–144, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. J. D. Calkins, D. El-Hinn, and W. J. Swanson, “Adaptive evolution in an avian reproductive protein: ZP3,” Journal of Molecular Evolution, vol. 65, no. 5, pp. 555–563, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. S. Berlin, L. Qu, and H. Ellegren, “Adaptive evolution of gamete-recognition proteins in birds,” Journal of Molecular Evolution, vol. 67, no. 5, pp. 488–496, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. M. D. Dean, N. L. Clark, G. D. Findlay et al., “Proteomics and comparative genomic investigations reveal heterogeneity in evolutionary rate of male reproductive proteins in mice (Mus domesticus),” Molecular Biology and Evolution, vol. 26, no. 8, pp. 1733–1743, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. J. M. Good and M. W. Nachman, “Rates of protein evolution are positively correlated with developmental timing of expression during mouse spermatogenesis,” Molecular Biology and Evolution, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 1044–1052, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. M. K. N. Lawniczak, A. I. Barnes, J. R. Linklater, J. M. Boone, S. Wigby, and T. Chapman, “Mating and immunity in invertebrates,” Trends in Ecology and Evolution, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 48–55, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. G. A. Parker, “Sperm competition and its evolutionary consequences in the insects,” Biological Reviews, vol. 45, no. 4, pp. 525–567, 1970. View at Google Scholar
  18. W. G. Eberhard, Female Control: Sexual Selection by Cryptic Female Choice, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, USA, 1996.
  19. G. A. Parker, “Sexual conflict over mating and fertilization: an overview,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London: Series B, vol. 361, no. 1466, pp. 235–259, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  20. T. R. Birkhead, “How stupid not to have thought of that: post-copulatory sexual selection,” Journal of Zoology, vol. 281, no. 2, pp. 78–93, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. L. Keller and H. K. Reeve, “Why do females mate with multiple males—the sexually selected sperm hypothesis,” Advances in the Study of Behavior, vol. 24, pp. 291–315, 1995. View at Google Scholar
  22. H. Kokko, M. D. Jennions, and R. Brooks, “Unifying and testing models of sexual selection,” Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 43–66, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  23. M. Andersson and L. W. Simmons, “Sexual selection and mate choice,” Trends in Ecology and Evolution, vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 296–302, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. L. W. Simmons, “The evolution of polyandry: sperm competition, sperm selection, and offspring viability,” Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 125–146, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. F. W. Avila, L. K. Sirot, B. A. LaFlamme, C. D. Rubinstein, and M. F. Wolfner, “Insect seminal fluid proteins: identification and function,” Annual Review of Entomology, vol. 56, pp. 21–40, 2011. View at Google Scholar
  26. T. M. Panhuis, N. L. Clark, and S. W. J., “Rapid evolution of reproductive proteins in abalone and Drosophila,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London: Series B, vol. 361, no. 1466, pp. 261–268, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  27. A. Civetta and R. S. Singh, “High divergence of reproductive tract proteins and their association with postzygotic reproductive isolation in Drosophila melanogaster and Drosophila virilis species,” Journal of Molecular Evolution, vol. 41, no. 6, pp. 1085–1095, 1995. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  28. J. Martin-Coello, H. Dopazo, L. Arbiza, J. Ausió, E. R. S. Roldan, and M. Gomendio, “Sexual selection drives weak positive selection in protamine genes and high promoter divergence, enhancing sperm competitiveness,” Proceedings of the Royal Society B, vol. 276, no. 1666, pp. 2427–2436, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  29. S. A. Ramm, L. McDonald, J. L. Hurst, R. J. Beynon, and P. Stockley, “Comparative proteomics reveals evidence for evolutionary diversification of rodent seminal fluid and its functional significance in sperm competition,” Molecular Biology and Evolution, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 189–198, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. C. Voolstra, D. Tautz, P. Farbrother, L. Eichinger, and B. Harr, “Contrasting evolution of expression differences in the testis between species and subspecies of the house mouse,” Genome Research, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 42–49, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  31. S. V. Nuzhdin, M. L. Wayne, K. L. Harmon, and L. M. McIntyre, “Common pattern of evolution of gene expression level and protein sequence in Drosophila,” Molecular Biology and Evolution, vol. 21, no. 7, pp. 1308–1317, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  32. C. D. Meiklejohn, J. Parsch, J. M. Ranz, and D. L. Hartl, “Rapid evolution of male-biased gene expression in Drosophila,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 100, no. 17, pp. 9894–9899, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  33. N. L. Clark, J. E. Aagaard, and W. J. Swanson, “Evolution of reproductive proteins from animals and plants,” Reproduction, vol. 131, no. 1, pp. 11–22, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  34. T. Chapman, “The soup in my fly: evolution, form and function of seminal fluid proteins,” PLoS Biology, vol. 6, no. 7, article e179, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  35. A. Civetta, “Shall we dance or shall we fight? using DNA sequence data to untangle controversies surrounding sexual selection,” Genome, vol. 46, no. 6, pp. 925–929, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  36. L. M. Turner and H. E. Hoekstra, “Causes and consequences of the evolution of reproductive proteins,” International Journal of Developmental Biology, vol. 52, no. 5-6, pp. 769–780, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  37. L. M. Turner, E. B. Chuong, and H. E. Hoekstra, “Comparative analysis of testis protein evolution in rodents,” Genetics, vol. 179, no. 4, pp. 2075–2089, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  38. N. Goldman and Z. Yang, “A codon-based model of nucleotide substitution for protein-coding DNA sequences,” Molecular Biology and Evolution, vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 725–736, 1994. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  39. Z. Yang, R. Nielsen, N. Goldman, and A. M. K. Pedersen, “Codon-substitution models for heterogeneous selection pressure at amino acid sites,” Genetics, vol. 155, no. 1, pp. 431–449, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  40. W. J. Swanson, A. Wong, M. F. Wolfner, and C. F. Aquadro, “Evolutionary expressed sequence tag analysis of Drosophila female reproductive tracts identifies genes subjected to positive selection,” Genetics, vol. 168, no. 3, pp. 1457–1465, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  41. R. V. Short, “Sexual selection and its component parts, somatic and genital selection, as illustrated by man and the great apes,” Advances in the Study of Behavior, vol. 9, pp. 131–158, 1979. View at Google Scholar
  42. R. W. Rose, C. M. Nevison, and A. F. Dixson, “Testes weight, body weight and mating systems in marsupials and monotremes,” Journal of Zoology, vol. 243, no. 3, pp. 523–531, 1997. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  43. A. P. Møller, “Ejaculate quality, testes size and sperm competition in primates,” Journal of Human Evolution, vol. 17, no. 5, pp. 479–488, 1988. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  44. G. Kenagy and S. Trombulak, “Size and function of mammalian testes in relation to body size,” Journal of Mammalogy, vol. 67, no. 1, pp. 1–22, 1986. View at Google Scholar
  45. D. J. Hosken, “Testes mass in megachiropteran bats varies in accordance with sperm competition theory,” Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, vol. 44, no. 3, pp. 169–177, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  46. A. H. Harcourt, P. H. Harvey, S. G. Larson, and R. V. Short, “Testis weight, body weight and breeding system in primates,” Nature, vol. 293, no. 5827, pp. 55–57, 1981. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  47. A. H. Harcourt, A. Purvis, and L. Liles, “Sperm competition: mating system, not breeding season, affects testes size of primates,” Functional Ecology, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 468–476, 1995. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  48. G. Arnqvist, “Comparative evidence for the evolution of genitalia by sexual selection,” Nature, vol. 393, no. 6687, pp. 784–786, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  49. G. Iossa, C. D. Soulsbury, P. J. Baker, and S. Harris, “Sperm competition and the evolution of testes size in terrestrial mammalian carnivores,” Functional Ecology, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 655–662, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  50. P. Stockley, M. J. G. Gage, G. A. Parker, and A. P. Møller, “Sperm competition in fishes: the evolution of testis size and ejaculate characteristics,” The American Naturalist, vol. 149, no. 5, pp. 933–954, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  51. M. J. G. Gage, “Associations between body size, mating pattern, testis size and sperm lengths across butterflies,” Proceedings of the Royal Society B, vol. 258, no. 1353, pp. 247–254, 1994. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  52. S. B. Emerson, “Testis size variation in frogs: testing the alternatives,” Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 227–235, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  53. S. Calhim and T. R. Birkhead, “Testes size in birds: quality versus quantity—assumptions, errors, and estimates,” Behavioral Ecology, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 271–275, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  54. J. Felsenstein, “Phylogenies and the comparative method,” The American Naturalist, vol. 125, no. 1, pp. 1–15, 1985. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  55. S. A. Ramm, G. A. Parker, and P. Stockley, “Sperm competition and the evolution of male reproductive anatomy in rodents,” Proceedings of the Royal Society B, vol. 272, no. 1566, pp. 949–955, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  56. S. Dorus, P. D. Evans, G. J. Wyckoff, S. S. Choi, and B. T. Lahn, “Rate of molecular evolution of the seminal protein gene SEMG2 correlates with levels of female promiscuity,” Nature Genetics, vol. 36, no. 12, pp. 1326–1329, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  57. D. J. Hosken and P. Stockley, “Sexual selection and genital evolution,” Trends in Ecology and Evolution, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 87–93, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  58. S. Pitnick, K. E. Jones, and G. S. Wilkinson, “Mating system and brain size in bats,” Proceedings of the Royal Society B, vol. 273, no. 1587, pp. 719–724, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  59. C. Mazzoldi, C. W. Petersen, and M. B. Rasotto, “The influence of mating system on seminal vesicle variability among gobies (Teleostei, Gobiidae),” Journal of Zoological Systematics and Evolutionary Research, vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 307–314, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  60. A. F. Dixson and M. J. Anderson, “Sexual selection, seminal coagulation and copulatory plug formation in primates,” Folia Primatologica, vol. 73, no. 2–3, pp. 63–69, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  61. G. Wlasiuk and M. W. Nachman, “Promiscuity and the rate of molecular evolution at primate immunity genes,” Evolution, vol. 64, no. 8, pp. 2204–2220, 2010. View at Google Scholar
  62. J. Zhang, R. Nielsen, and Z. Yang, “Evaluation of an improved branch-site likelihood method for detecting positive selection at the molecular level,” Molecular Biology and Evolution, vol. 22, no. 12, pp. 2472–2479, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  63. S. Finn and A. Civetta, “Sexual selection and the molecular evolution of ADAM proteins,” Journal of Molecular Evolution, vol. 71, no. 3, pp. 231–240, 2010. View at Google Scholar
  64. H. Herlyn and H. Zischler, “Sequence evolution of the sperm ligand zonadhesin correlates negatively with body weight dimorphism in primates,” Evolution, vol. 61, no. 2, pp. 289–298, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  65. A. Bretman and T. Tregenza, “Measuring polyandry in wild populations: a case study using promiscuous crickets,” Molecular Ecology, vol. 14, no. 7, pp. 2169–2179, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  66. M. D. Dean, K. G. Ardlie, and M. W. Nachman, “The frequency of multiple paternity suggests that sperm competition is common in house mice (Mus domesticus),” Molecular Ecology, vol. 15, no. 13, pp. 4141–4151, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  67. S. C. Griffith, I. P. F. Owens, and K. A. Thuman, “Extra pair paternity in birds: a review of interspecific variation and adaptive function,” Molecular Ecology, vol. 11, no. 11, pp. 2195–2212, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  68. B. Hurle, W. Swanson, and E. D. Green, “Comparative sequence analyses reveal rapid and divergent evolutionary changes of the WFDC locus in the primate lineage,” Genome Research, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 276–286, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  69. T. D. O'Connor and N. I. Mundy, “Genotype-phenotype associations: substitution models to detect evolutionary associations between phenotypic variables and genotypic evolutionary rate,” Bioinformatics, vol. 25, no. 12, pp. i94–i100, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  70. N. Lartillot and R. Poujol, “A phylogenetic model for investigating correlated evolution of substitution rates and continuous phenotypic characters,” Molecular Biology and Evolution, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 729–744, 2010. View at Google Scholar
  71. I. Mayrose and S. P. Otto, “A likelihood method for detecting trait-dependent shifts in the rate of molecular evolution,” Molecular Biology and Evolution, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 759–770, 2010. View at Google Scholar
  72. A. K. Holloway and D. J. Begun, “Molecular evolution and population genetics of duplicated accessory gland protein genes in Drosophila,” Molecular Biology and Evolution, vol. 21, no. 9, pp. 1625–1628, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  73. T. Markow, “Evolution of Drosophila mating systems,” Evolutionary Biology, vol. 29, pp. 73–106, 1996. View at Google Scholar
  74. T. A. Markow and P. M. O'Grady, “Evolutionary genetics of reproductive behavior in Drosophila: connecting the dots,” Annual Review of Genetics, vol. 39, pp. 263–291, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  75. E. S. Kelleher, W. J. Swanson, and T. A. Markow, “Gene duplication and adaptive evolution of digestive proteases in Drosophila arizonae female reproductive tracts,” PLoS Genetics, vol. 3, no. 8, article e148, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  76. F. C. Almeida and R. Desalle, “Orthology, function and evolution of accessory gland proteins in the Drosophila repleta group,” Genetics, vol. 181, no. 1, pp. 235–245, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  77. B. J. Wagstaff and D. J. Begun, “Adaptive evolution of recently duplicated accessory gland protein genes in desert Drosophila,” Genetics, vol. 177, no. 2, pp. 1023–1030, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  78. B. J. Wagstaff and D. J. Begun, “Molecular population genetics of accessory gland protein genes and testis-expressed genes in Drosophila mojavensis and D. arizonae,” Genetics, vol. 171, no. 3, pp. 1083–1101, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  79. J. R. Walters and R. G. Harrison, “Combined EST and proteomic analysis identifies rapidly evolving seminal fluid proteins in Heliconius butterflies,” Molecular Biology and Evolution, vol. 27, no. 9, pp. 2000–2013, 2010. View at Google Scholar
  80. R. Nielsen, “Molecular signatures of natural selection,” Annual Review of Genetics, vol. 39, pp. 197–218, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  81. J. D. Jensen, A. Wong, and C. F. Aquadro, “Approaches for identifying targets of positive selection,” Trends in Genetics, vol. 23, no. 11, pp. 568–577, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  82. S. B. Kingan, M. Tatar, and D. M. Rand, “Reduced polymorphism in the chimpanzee semen coagulating protein, semenogelin I,” Journal of Molecular Evolution, vol. 57, no. 2, pp. 159–169, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  83. M. I. Jensen-Seaman and W. H. Li, “Evolution of the hominoid semenogelin genes, the major proteins of ejaculated semen,” Journal of Molecular Evolution, vol. 57, no. 3, pp. 261–270, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus