Comparative analysis of sex ratios

doi:10.1017/CBO9780511542053.007

Chapter 6 - Comparative analysis of sex ratios

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 06 August 2009

Peter J. Mayhew and

Ido Pen

Edited by

Ian C. W. Hardy

Show author details

Peter J. Mayhew: Affiliation:
Department of Biology, University of York, United Kingdom
Ido Pen: Affiliation:
Zoological Laboratory, University of Groningen, The Netherlands
Ian C. W. Hardy: Affiliation:
University of Nottingham

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Comparative studies use the characteristics of different taxa as a source of data, and such studies have made important contributions towards the understanding of sex ratios. Comparative data require special methods for statistical analysis because not all the variance in taxon characteristics is evolutionarily independent. Solving this problem requires explicit phylogenetic and evolutionary assumptions that create challenges at each stage of a comparative study. Here we review the essentials of a comparative approach: asking questions, collecting data, choosing methods, analysing data and drawing conclusions. We include a worked example of a recent sex ratio study on New World nonpollinating fig wasps (West & Herre 1998a), which we analyse using phylogenetically independent contrasts and by simulation methods. Finally we review the relevant software for comparative analysis of sex ratios and how to obtain it.

Introduction

I find that in Great Britain there are 32 indigenous trees[:] of these 19 or more than half … have their sexes separated, – an enormous proportion compared with the remainder of the British flora: nor is this wholly owing to a chance coincidence in some one family having many trees and having a tendency to separated sexes: for the 32 trees belong to nine families and the trees with separate sexes to five families.

Charles Darwin, from Stauffer (ed) (1975).

In recent years an abundance of reviews has dealt with the theoretical problems of conducting a comparative study (Ridley 1983, Brooks & McLennan 1991, Harvey & Pagel 1991, Martins 1996a, Pagel 1999).

Type: Chapter
Information: Sex Ratios
Concepts and Research Methods
, pp. 132 - 156

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511542053.007 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Abouheif, E (1999) A method for testing the assumption of phylogenetic independence in comparative data. Evolutionary Ecology Research, 1, 895–909Google Scholar

Arneberg, P, Skorping, A & Read, A F (1997) Is population density a species character? Comparative analyses of the nematode parasites of mammals. Oikos, 80, 289–300CrossRef Google Scholar

Arnqvist, G & Wooster, D (1995) Metaanalysis – synthesizing research findings in ecology and evolution. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 10, 236–240CrossRef Google Scholar

Bininda-Emonds, O R P, Gittleman, J L & Purvis, A (1999) Building large trees by combining phylogenetic information: a complete phylogeny of the extant Carnivora (Mammalia). Biological Reviews, 74, 143–175CrossRef Google Scholar

Björklund, M (1997) Are ‘comparative methods’ always necessary?Oikos, 80, 607–612CrossRef Google Scholar

Brooks D R & McLennan D A (1991) Phylogeny, ecology and behavior. Chicago: University of Chicago Press

Burt, A (1989) Comparative methods using phylogenetically independent contrasts. Oxford Surveys in Evolutionary Biology, 6, 33–53Google Scholar

Cheverud, J M, Dow, M M & Leutenegger, W (1985) The quantitative assessment of phylogenetic constraints in comparative analyses: sexual dimorphism in body weight among primates. Evolution, 39, 1335–1351CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Crawley M J (1993) GLIM for Ecologists. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific

Dijkstra, C, Daan, S & Pen, I (1998) Fledgling sex ratios in relation to brood size in size-dimorphic altricial birds. Behavioral Ecology, 9, 287–296CrossRef Google Scholar

Fellowes, M D E, Compton, S G & Cook, J M (1999) Sex allocation and local mate competition in the Old World non-pollinating fig wasps. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 46, 95–102CrossRef Google Scholar

Felsenstein, J (1985) Phylogenies and the comparative method. American Naturalist, 125, 1–15CrossRef Google Scholar

Felsenstein, J (1988) Phylogenies and quantitative characters. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 19, 445–471CrossRef Google Scholar

Freckleton, R P (2000) Phylogenetic tests of ecological and evolutionary hypotheses: checking for phylogenetic independence. Functional Ecology, 14, 129–134CrossRef Google Scholar

Garland, T & Adolph, S C (1994) Why not to do two species comparative tests – limitations on infering adaptations. Physiological Zoology, 67, 797–828CrossRef Google Scholar

Garland, T & Ives, A R (2000) Using the past to predict the present: confidence intervals for regression equations in phylogenetic comparative methods. American Naturalist, 155, 346–364CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Garland, T, Harvey, P H & Ives, A R (1992) Procedures for the analysis of comparative data using phylogenetically independent contrasts. Systematic Biology, 41, 18–32CrossRef Google Scholar

Garland, T, Dickerman, A W, Janis, C M & Jones, J A (1993) Phylogenetic analysis of covariance by computer simulation. Systematic Biology, 42, 265–292CrossRef Google Scholar

Garland, T, Midford, P E & Ives, A R (1999) An introduction to phylogenetically based statistical methods, with a new method for confidence intervals on ancestral states. American Zoologist, 39, 374–388CrossRef Google Scholar

Gittleman, J L & Kot, M (1990) Adaptation: statistics and a null model for estimating phylogenetic effects. Systematic Zoology, 39, 227–241CrossRef Google Scholar

Gittleman, J L & Luh, H-K (1992) On comparing comparative methods. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 23, 383–404CrossRef Google Scholar

Gittleman JL, Anderson CG, Kot M & Luh H-K (1996) Comparative tests of evolutionary lability and rates using molecular phylogenies. In: P H Harvey, A J Leigh Brown, J Maynard Smith & S Nee (eds) New Uses for New Phylogenies, pp 289–307. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Gowaty, P A (1993) Differential dispersal, local resource competition, and sex ratio variation in birds. American Naturalist, 141, 263–280CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Grafen, A (1989) The phylogenetic regression. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 326, 119–157CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Grafen, A & Ridley, M (1996) Statistical tests for discrete cross-species data. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 193, 255–267CrossRef Google Scholar

Griffiths, N T & Godfray, H C J (1988) Local mate competition, sex ratio and clutch size in bethylid wasps. Behavioural Ecology and Sociobiology, 22, 211–217CrossRef Google Scholar

Hamilton, W D (1967) Extraordinary sex ratios. Science, 156, 477–488CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Hardy, I C W (1994) Sex ratio and mating structure in the parasitoid Hymenoptera. Oikos, 69, 3–20CrossRef Google Scholar

Hardy, I C W & Mayhew, P J (1998a) Sex ratio, sexual dimorphism and mating structure in bethylid wasps. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 42, 383–395CrossRef Google Scholar

Hardy, I C W & Mayhew, P J (1998b) Partial local mating and the sex ratio: indirect comparative evidence. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 13, 431–432CrossRef Google Scholar

Hardy, I C W & Mayhew, P J (1999) Reply to M. D. Drapeau. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 14, 235CrossRef Google Scholar

Hardy, I C W, Dijkstra, L J, Gillis, J E M & Luft, P A (1998) Patterns of sex ratio, virginity and developmental mortality in gregarious parasitoids. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 64, 239–270CrossRef Google Scholar

Harvey, P H (1996) Phylogenies for ecologists. Journal of Animal Ecology, 65, 255–263CrossRef Google Scholar

Harvey PH & Nee S (1997) The phylogenetic foundations of behavioural ecology. In: J R Krebs & N B Davies (eds) Behavioural Ecology, An Evolutionary Approach, pp 334–349. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific

Harvey P H & Pagel M D (1991) The Comparative Method in Evolutionary Biology. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Herre, E A (1987) Optimality, plasticity, and selective regime in fig wasp sex ratios. Nature, 329, 627–629CrossRef Google Scholar

Herre EA, West SA, Cook JM, Compton SG & Kjellberg F (1997) Fig-associated wasps: pollinators, sex-ratio adjustment and male polymorphism, population structure and its consequences. In: J Choe & B Crespi (eds) Social Competition and Cooperation in Insects and Arachnids. volume 1. The Evolution of Mating Systems, pp 226–239. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Johnson, C N (1988) Dispersal and the sex ratio at birth in primates. Nature, 332, 726–728CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Losos, J B (1994) An approach to the analysis of comparative data when a phylogeny is unavailable or incomplete. Systematic Biology, 43, 117–123CrossRef Google Scholar

Machado, C A, Herre, E A & Bermingham, E (1996) Molecular phylogenies of fig pollinating and non-pollinating wasps and the implications for the origin and evolution of the fig-fig wasp mutualism. Journal of Biogeography, 23, 531–542CrossRef Google Scholar

Maddison, W P (1990) A method for testing the correlated evolution of two binary characters: are gains or losses concentrated on certain branches of the tree?Evolution, 44, 539–557CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Maddison W P & Maddison D R (1992) MacClade. Analysis of Phylogeny and Character Evolution. Sunderland, Massachusetts: Sinauer

Martins E P (ed) (1996a) Phylogenies and the Comparative Method in Animal Behavior. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Martins, E P (1996b) Conducting phylogenetic comparative studies when the phylogeny is not known. Evolution, 50, 12–22CrossRef Google Scholar

Martins, E P & Hansen, T F (1997) Phylogenies and the comparative method: a general approach to incorporating phylogenetic information into the analysis of interspecific data. American Naturalist, 149, 646–667CrossRef Google Scholar

Mayhew, P J (1998) The evolution of gregariousness in parasitoid wasps. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, B, 265, 383–389CrossRef Google Scholar

Mayhew, P J & Blackburn, T M (1999) Does development mode organize life history traits in the parasitoid Hymenoptera?Journal of Animal Ecology, 68, 906–916CrossRef Google Scholar

Mayhew, P J & Hardy, I C W (1998) Nonsiblicidal behavior and the evolution of clutch size in bethylid wasps. American Naturalist, 151, 409–424CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Mitani, J C, Gros-Louis, J & Richards, A F (1996) Sexual dimorphism, the operational sex ratio, and the intensity of male competition in polygynous primates. American Naturalist, 147, 966–980CrossRef Google Scholar

M″ller, A P & Birkhead, T R (1992) A pairwise comparative method as illustrated by copulation frequency in birds. American Naturalist, 139, 644–656CrossRef Google Scholar

Pagel, M D (1992) A method for the analysis of comparative data. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 136, 361–364Google Scholar

Pagel M (1994a) The adaptationist wager. In: P Eggleton & R I Vane-Wright (eds) Phylogenetics and Ecology, pp 29–51. London: Academic Press

Pagel, M (1994b) Detecting correlated evolution on phylogenies: a general method for the comparative analysis of discrete characters. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, B, 255, 37–45CrossRef Google Scholar

Pagel, M (1999) Inferring the historical patterns of biological evolution. Nature, 401, 877–884CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Poulin, R (1997a) Covariation of sexual size dimorphism and adult sex ratio in parasitic nematodes. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 62, 567–580CrossRef Google Scholar

Poulin, R (1997b) Population abundance and sex ratio in dioecious helminth parasites. Oecologia, 111, 375–380CrossRef Google Scholar

Price, T (1997a) Book review: phylogenies and the comparative method in animal behavior (EP Martins (ed)). Animal Behaviour 54: 235–238Google Scholar

Price, T (1997b) Correlated evolution and independent contrasts. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, B, 352, 519–529CrossRef Google Scholar

Purvis, A (1995) A composite estimate of primate phylogeny. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, B, 348, 405–421CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Purvis, A & Harvey, P H (1995) Mammal life-history evolution: a comparative test of Charnov's model. Journal of Zoology, 237, 259–283CrossRef Google Scholar

Purvis, A & Rambaut, A (1995) Comparative analysis by independent contrasts (CAIC); an Apple Macintosh application for analyzing comparative data. Computer Applications in the Biosciences, 11, 247–251Google Scholar

Purvis, A, Gittleman, J L & Luh, H-K (1994) Truth or consequences: effects of phylogenetic accuracy on two comparative methods. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 167, 293–300CrossRef Google Scholar

Read, A F, Anwar, M, Shutler, D & Nee, S (1995) Sex allocation and population structure in malaria and related parasitic protozoa. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, B, 260, 359–363CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Richman, A D & Price, T (1992) Evolution of ecological differences in the old world leaf warblers. Nature, 355, 817–821CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Ricklefs, R E (1998) Evolutionary theories of aging: confirmation of a fundamental prediction, with implications for the genetic basis and evolution of lifespan. American Naturalist, 152, 24–44CrossRef Google Scholar

Ricklefs, R E & Starck, J M (1996) Applications of phylogenetically independent contrasts: a mixed progress report. Oikos, 77, 167–172CrossRef Google Scholar

Ridley M (1983) The Explanation of Organic Diversity: the Comparative Method and Adaptations for Mating. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Ridley, M (1989) Why not to use species in comparative tests. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 136, 361–364CrossRef Google Scholar

Ridley M & Grafen A (1996) How to study discrete comparative methods. In: E P Martins (ed) Phylogenies and the Comparative Method in Animal Behavior, pp 70–103. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Sanderson, M J, Purvis, A & Henze, C (1998) Phylogenetic supertrees: assembling the trees of life. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 13, 105–109CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Seehausen, O, Mayhew, P J & , Alphen J J M (1999) Evolution of colour patterns in East African cichlid fish. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 12, 514–534CrossRef Google Scholar

Shutler, D, Bennett, G F & Mullie, A (1995) Sex proportions of Haemoproteus blood parasites and local mate competition. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, USA, 92, 6748–6752CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Sillén-Tullberg, B (1993) The effect of biased inclusion of taxa on the correlation between discrete characters in phylogenetic trees. Evolution, 47, 1182–1191CrossRef Google Scholar

Slagsvold, T, R″skaft, E & Engen, S (1986) Sex ratio, differential cost of rearing young, and differential mortality between the sexes during the period of parental care: Fisher's theory applied to birds. Ornis Scandinavica, 17, 117–125CrossRef Google Scholar

Stauffer R C (ed) (1975) Charles Darwin's Natural Selection. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Waage, J K (1982) Sib-mating and sex ratio strategies in scelionid wasps. Ecological Entomology, 7, 103–112CrossRef Google Scholar

Weatherhead, P J & Montgomerie, R (1995) Local resource competition and sex ratio variation in birds. Journal of Avian Biology, 26, 168–171CrossRef Google Scholar

West, S A & Herre, E A (1998a) Partial local mate competition and the sex ratio: a study on non-pollinating fig wasps. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 11, 531–548CrossRef Google Scholar

West, S A & Herre, E A (1998b) Stabilizing selection and variance in fig wasp sex ratios. Evolution, 52, 475–485CrossRef Google Scholar

West, S A, Herre, E A, Compton, S G, Godfray, H C J & Cook, J M (1997) A comparative study of virginity in fig wasps. Animal Behaviour, 54, 437–450CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Westoby, M, Leishman, M R & Lord, J M (1995) On misinterpreting the ‘phylogenetic correction’. Journal of Ecology, 83, 531–534CrossRef Google Scholar

Wilson E O (1994) Naturalist. Washington: Island Press