2006
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0508609103
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Experimental evidence for interspecific directional selection on moth pheromone communication

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

1
106
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 93 publications
(109 citation statements)
references
References 87 publications
1
106
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The reason why the pit vipers have a special preference for moths is unknown. A possible assumption would be that they are attracted by the smell of pheromone given off by the moths for sex attraction (Groot et al, 2006). These questions need further investigation.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The reason why the pit vipers have a special preference for moths is unknown. A possible assumption would be that they are attracted by the smell of pheromone given off by the moths for sex attraction (Groot et al, 2006). These questions need further investigation.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although previous studies (Gries et al, 2001;McElfresh and Millar, 2001) had only demonstrated the pattern of reproductive character displacement among moth species, Groot et al (2006) conducted experiments to determine whether communication interference from males of these closely related species could exert strong enough directional selection to cause evolution of chemical mating signals in the face of stabilizing selection by conspecifics. Specifically, they first tested whether interspecific communication interference could be a directional selection force: they introduced quantitative trait locus (QTL) for low production of the acetate compound (typical of Hv female pheromone blend) into an Hs genetic background and measured, in field and cage experiments, the capacity of modified Hs females to attract and mate with Hs and Hv males.…”
Section: Evolution Of Chemosensory Premating Isolationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Heliothis virescens (hereafter referred to as Hv) is a generalist, feeding on plants in over 14 families, whereas Heliothis subflexa (Hs) specializes on plants within the genus Physalis (28,29). These two species are not attracted to each other in field locations where they cooccur because of differential response to pheromone blends (28), but they can be mated and backcrossed in the laboratory (28).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Heliothis virescens (hereafter referred to as Hv) is a generalist, feeding on plants in over 14 families, whereas Heliothis subflexa (Hs) specializes on plants within the genus Physalis (28,29). These two species are not attracted to each other in field locations where they cooccur because of differential response to pheromone blends (28), but they can be mated and backcrossed in the laboratory (28). Our previous quantitative trait locus (QTL) studies with backcross (BC) families demonstrated that genes on at least nine of the 31 Heliothis chromosomes contribute to the differences between the species in the volatile compounds produced by the pheromone gland and indicate that there can be epistatic interactions among the QTL (29,30).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation