SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • Allison, J.D. & Cardé, R.T. 2006. Heritable variation in the sex pheromone of the almond moth, Cadra cautella. J. Chem. Ecol. 32: 621641.
  • Allison, J.D. & Cardé, R.T. 2007. Bidirectional selection for novel pheromone blend ratios in the almond moth, Cadra cautella. J. Chem. Ecol. 33: 22932307.
  • Allison, J.D. & Cardé, R.T. 2008. Male pheromone blend preference function measured in choice and no-choice wind-tunnel trials with Cadra cautella. Anim. Behav. 75: 259266.
  • Bakker, T.C.M. 1993. Positive genetic correlation between female preference and preferred male ornament in sticklebacks. Nature 363: 255257.
  • Blows, M.W. 1999. Evolution of the genetic covariance between male and female components of mate recognition: an experimental test. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 266: 21692174.
  • Boake, C.R.B. 1991. Coevolution of senders and receivers of sexual signals: genetic coupling and genetic correlations. Trends Ecol. Evol. 6: 225227.
  • Breden, F. & Hornaday, K. 1994. A test of indirect models of sexual selection in the Trinidad guppy. Heredity 73: 291297.
  • Brooks, R. & Couldridge, V. 1999. Multiple sexual ornaments coevolve with multiple mating preferences. Am. Nat. 154: 3745.
  • Butlin, R.K. & Ritchie, M.G. 1989. Genetic coupling in mate recognition systems: what is the evidence? Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 37: 237246.
  • Cardé, R.T. & Baker, T.C. 1984. Sexual communication with pheromones. In: Chemical Ecology of Insects (W.J.Bell & R.T.Cardé, eds), pp. 355383. Chapman & Hall, London.
  • Cardé, R.T. & Haynes, K.F. 2004. Structure of the pheromone communication channel in moths. In: Advances in Insect Chemical Ecology (R.T.Cardé & J.G.Millar, eds), pp. 283332. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  • Cardé, R.T., Baker, T.C. & Roelofs, W.L. 1976. Sex attractant responses of male oriental fruit moths to a range of component ratios – pheromone polymorphism? Experientia 32: 14061407.
  • Coyne, J.A. & Orr, H.A. 1989. Patterns of speciation in Drosophila. Evolution 43: 362381.
  • Coyne, J.A. & Orr, H.A. 1997. “Patterns of speciation in Drosophila” revisited. Evolution 51: 295303.
  • David, C.T. 1982. Competition between fixed and moving stripes in the control of orientation by flying Drosophila. Physiol. Entomol. 7: 151156.
  • Doherty, J.A. & Gerhardt, H.C. 1983. Hybrid tree frogs: vocalizations of males and selective phonotaxis of females. Science 220: 10781080.
  • Emelianov, I., Simpson, F., Narang, P. & Mallet, J. 2003. Host choice promotes reproductive isolation between host races of the larch budmoth Zeiraphera diniana. J. Evol. Biol. 16: 208218.
  • Endler, J.A. 1992. Signals, signal conditions, and the direction of evolution. Am. Nat. 139: S125S153.
  • Garland, T. Jr 2003. Selection experiments: an under-utilized tool in biomechanics and organismal biology. In: Vertebrate Biomechanics and Evolution (V.L.Bels, J.P.Gasc & A.Casinos, eds), pp. 2356. BIOSIS Scientific Publishers Ltd, Oxford.
  • Gleason, J.M. & Ritchie, M.G. 1998. Evolution of courtship song and reproductive isolation in the Drosophila willistoni species complex: do sexual signals diverge the most quickly? Evolution 52: 14931500.
  • Groot, A.T., Horovitz, J.L., Hamilton, J., Santangelo, R.G., Schal, C. & Gould, F. 2006. Experimental evidence for interspecific directional selection on moth pheromone communication. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 103: 58585863.
  • Haynes, K.F., Gaston, L.K., Pope, M.M. & Baker, T.C. 1984. Potential for evolution of resistance to pheromones – interindividual and interpopulational variation in chemical communication-system of pink bollworm moth. J. Chem. Ecol. 10: 15511565.
  • Holloway, J.D., Bradley, J.D. & Carter, D.J. 1987. Lepidoptera. In: CIE Guides to Insects of Importance to Man (C.R.Betts, ed.), pp. 122. CAB International, Oxford.
  • Houde, A.E. 1994. Effect of artificial selection on male colour patterns on mating preference of female guppies. Proc R. Soc. Lond. B 256: 125130.
  • Hoy, R.R. & Paul, R.C. 1973. Genetic control of song specificity in crickets. Science 180: 8283.
  • Hoy, R.R., Hahn, J. & Paul, R.C. 1977. Hybrid cricket auditory behaviour: evidence for genetic coupling in animal communication. Science 195: 8284.
  • Iyengar, V.K., Reeve, H.K. & Eisner, T. 2002. Paternal inheritance of a female moths’ mating preference. Nature 419: 830832.
  • Klun, J.A. & Maini, S. 1979. Genetic basis of an insect chemical communication system: the European corn borer. Environ. Entomol. 8: 423426.
  • Lande, R. 1981. Models of speciation by sexual selection on polygenic traits. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 78: 37213725.
  • Löfstedt, C. 1993. Moth pheromone genetics and evolution. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 340: 167177.
  • Löfstedt, C., Hansson, B.S., Roelofs, W.L. & Bengtsson, B.O. 1989. No linkage between genes controlling female pheromone production and male pheromone response in the European corn borer, Ostrinia nubilalis Hübner (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae). Genetics 123: 553556.
  • Löfstedt, C., Herrebout, M. & Menken, S.B.J. 1991. Sex pheromones and their potential role in the evolution of reproductive isolation in small ermine moths (Yponomeutidae). Chemoecology 2: 2028.
  • McElfresh, J.S. & Millar, J.G. 2001. Geographic variation in the pheromone system of the saturniid moth Hemileuca eglanterina. Ecology 82: 35053518.
  • Phelan, P.L. 1992. Evolution of sex pheromones and the role of asymmetric tracking. In: Insect Chemical Ecology: An Evolutionary Approach (B.D.Roitberg & M.B.Isman, eds), pp. 265314. Chapman & Hall, New York.
  • Pomiankowski, A. & Sheridan, L. 1994. Linked sexiness and choosiness. Trends Ecol. Evol. 9: 242244.
  • Qvarnström, A., Brommer, J.E. & Gustafsson, L. 2006. Testing the genetics underlying the co-evolution of mate choice and ornament in the wild. Nature 441: 8486.
  • Ritchie, M.G., Saarikettu, M. & Hoikkala, A. 2005. Variation, but no covariance, in female preference functions and male song in a natural population of Drosophila montana. Anim. Behav. 70: 849854.
  • Roelofs, W.L. & Comeau, A. 1969. Sex pheromone specificity: taxonomic and evolutionary aspects in Lepidoptera. Science 165: 398400.
  • Roff, D.A. 1997. Evolutionary Quantitative Genetics. Chapman & Hall, New York.
  • Sætre, G.P., Moum, T., Bures, S., Kral, M., Adamjan, M. & Moreno, J. 1997. A sexually selected character displacement in flycatchers reinforces premating isolation. Nature 387: 589592.
  • Svensson, E.I., Eroukhmanoff, F. & Friberg, M. 2006. Effects of natural and sexual selection on adaptive population divergence and premating isolation in a damselfly. Evolution 60: 12421253.
  • Tumlinson, J.H., Yonce, C.E., Doolittle, R.E., Heath, R.R., Gentry, C.R. & Mitchell, E.R. 1974. Sex pheromones and reproductive isolation of the lesser peachtree borer and the peachtree borer. Science 185: 614616.
  • Webster, R.P. & Cardé, R.T. 1984. The effects of mating, exogenous juvenile-hormone and a juvenile-hormone analogue on pheromone titre, calling and oviposition in the omnivorous leafroller moth (Platynota stultana). J. Insect Physiol. 30: 113118.
  • Wilkinson, G.S. & Reillo, P.R. 1994. Female choice response to artificial selection on an exaggerated male trait in a stalk-eyed fly. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 255: 16.
  • Zhu, J.W., Chastain, B.B., Spohn, B.G. & Haynes, K.F. 1997. Assortative mating in two pheromone strains of the cabbage looper moth, Trichoplusia ni. J. Insect Behav. 10: 805817.