Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

Fitness Consequences of Reciprocally Asymmetric Hybridization Between Simultaneous Hermaphrodites

Fitness Consequences of Reciprocally Asymmetric Hybridization Between Simultaneous Hermaphrodites

Abstract

Depending on fitness consequences, hybridization may rescue inbred populations; generate premating barriers, reproductive interference, or hybrid species; or extinguish a species. However, the fitness of hybrids is unpredictable without direct quantification of their performance in fitness components across multiple generations. The land snails Bradybaena pellucida and B. similaris, which are indigenous and non-indigenous in Japan, respectively, copulate with each other simultaneously and reciprocally. However, only B. pellucida produces hybrids, because it ends mating by removing the penis before transferring a spermatophore, while B. similaris inseminates B. pellucida. To evaluate the strength of an intrinsic postzygotic barrier against the hybrids produced by B. pellucida, we conducted breeding experiments in the laboratory and measured six life-history traits: (1) growth rate, (2) body weight at maturity, (3) number of days to first oviposition after being permitted to mate, (4) clutch size, (5) fecundity, and (6) hatchability. We also calculated the relative intrinsic fitness based on five of these trait values (excluding clutch size). F(1) hybrids exhibited heterosis in growth rate, body weight at maturity and relative intrinsic fitness. F(2) hybrids also showed heterosis in body weight at maturity. Nevertheless, the F(2) hybrids produced significantly fewer progeny than the mid-point value of the parental species. Thus, the F(2) hybrids exhibited weak out-breeding depression in reproduction, offsetting their vigor in body size. These results indicate that only a weak postzygotic barrier, contrasting with strong F(1) heterosis, has evolved during genetic divergence of the two sibling species in allopatry. Article ZOOLOGICAL SCIENCE. 26(3):191-196 (2009)

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average
bronze