1420-9101/asset/JEB_left.gif?v=1&s=cdd0a87e0640cdbe1b969dbbd029d612b7a1748a)
1420-9101/asset/JEB_right.gif?v=1&s=1566ac71d957297ac097f5a646bcb0098128b801)
DDT resistance, epistasis and male fitness in flies
Article first published online: 20 APR 2011
DOI: 10.1111/j.1420-9101.2011.02271.x
© 2011 The Authors. Journal of Evolutionary Biology © 2011 European Society For Evolutionary Biology
Additional Information
How to Cite
SMITH, D. T., HOSKEN, D. J., ROSTANT, W. G., YEO, M., GRIFFIN, R. M., BRETMAN, A., PRICE, T. A. R., FFRENCH-CONSTANT, R. H. and WEDELL, N. (2011), DDT resistance, epistasis and male fitness in flies. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 24: 1351–1362. doi: 10.1111/j.1420-9101.2011.02271.x
Publication History
- Issue published online: 6 MAY 2011
- Article first published online: 20 APR 2011
- Received 18 January 2011; revised 4 March 2011; accepted 8 March 2011
- Abstract
- Article
- References
- Cited By
Keywords:
- Accord;
- Drosophila melanogaster;
- insecticide;
- selection;
- transposable element
Abstract
In Drosophila melanogaster, the DDT resistance allele (DDT-R) is beneficial in the presence of DDT. Interestingly, DDT-R also elevates female fitness in the absence of DDT and existed in populations before DDT use. However, DDT-R did not spread regardless of DDT-independent selective advantages in females. We ask whether sexual antagonism could explain why DDT-R did not spread before pesticide use. We tested pre- and post-copulatory male fitness correlates in two genetic backgrounds into which we backcrossed the DDT-R allele. We found costs to DDT-R that depended on the genetic background in which DDT-R was found and documented strong epistasis between genetic background and DDT-R that influenced male size. Although it remains unclear whether DDT-R is generally sexually antagonistic, or whether the fitness costs noted would be sufficient to retard the spread of DDT-R in the absence of DDT, general fitness advantages to DDT-R in the absence of DDT may be unlikely.