Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Intralocus sexual conflict and insecticide resistance
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Intralocus sexual conflict and insecticide resistance
Do you wish to request the book?
Intralocus sexual conflict and insecticide resistance
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Intralocus sexual conflict and insecticide resistance
2016
Overview
The BA allele of the Drosophila cytochrome P450 gene Cyp6g1 confers resistance to a range of insecticides. It is also subject to intralocus sexual conflict when introgressed into the Canton-S background, whose collection predates the widespread use of insecticides. In this genetic background, the allele confers a pleiotropic fitness benefit to females but a cost to males, and exhibits little sexual dimorphism in conferred insecticide resistance. It is unclear whether these sexually antagonistic effects also exist in current populations that have naturally evolved with insecticides, where genetic modifiers that offset male costs might be expected to evolve. Here, we explore these issues using Drosophila melanogaster caught recently from an Australian population in which the BA allele naturally segregates. While we find increased fecundity in insecticide-resistant BA females and no consistent evidence of fitness costs in males, experimental evolution indicates balancing selection at the locus. We suggest that this apparent discrepancy may be due to reduced investment in reproduction in resistant males. Our results at the population level are consistent with previous work, and suggest that individual-level fitness assays do not always capture sexually antagonistic fitness effects that emerge in a population context.
Publisher
The Royal Society
