Article

Having sex, yes, but with whom? Inferences from fungi on the evolution of anisogamy and mating types.

Université Lille Nord de France, USTL, GEPV, CNRS, FRE 3268, Villeneuve d'Ascq, France.
Biological Reviews (Impact Factor: 10.26). 05/2011; 86(2):421-42. DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-185X.2010.00153.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The advantage of sex has been among the most debated issues in biology. Surprisingly, the question of why sexual reproduction generally requires the combination of distinct gamete classes, such as small and large gametes, or gametes with different mating types, has been much less investigated. Why do systems with alternative gamete classes (i.e. systems with either anisogamy or mating types or both) appear even though they restrict the probability of finding a compatible mating partner? Why does the number of gamete classes vary from zero to thousands, with most often only two classes? We review here the hypotheses proposed to explain the origin, maintenance, number, and loss of gamete classes. We argue that fungi represent highly suitable models to help resolve issues related to the evolution of distinct gamete classes, because the number of mating types vary from zero to thousands across taxa, anisogamy is present or not, and because there are frequent transitions between these conditions. We review the nature and number of gamete classes in fungi, and we attempt to draw inferences from these data on the evolutionary forces responsible for their appearance, loss or maintenance, and number.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
211 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Mating systems show two kinds of frequent transitions: from hermaphroditism to dioecy, gynodioecy or androdioecy, or from self-incompatibility (SI) to self-compatibility (SC). While models have mostly investigated these two kinds of transitions as independent, empirical observations suggest that, to some extent, they can evolve jointly. Here, we study the joint evolution and maintenance of SI and androdioecy or SI and gynodioecy by the means of phenotypic models. Our models focus on three parameters: the unisexuals' advantage relative to that of the hermaphrodites due to resource reallocation, inbreeding depression and the selfing rate. We assume no pollen limitation or discounting. We show that SI helps the maintenance of androdioecy, but favors the loss of gynodioecy, and also that androdioecy facilitates the maintenance of SI, whereas gynodioecy does not affect it. We finally investigate how gynodioecy and androdioecy may affect the diversification of SI groups, especially considering an evolutionary pathway through SC intermediates. We show that while androdioecy prevents the increase of the number of SI groups, under certain conditions of inbreeding depression and selfing rates, gynodioecy allows it.
    Journal of Theoretical Biology 02/2015; · 2.35 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Why the DNA-containing organelles, chloroplasts, and mitochondria, are inherited maternally is a long standing and unsolved question. However, recent years have seen a paradigm shift, in that the absoluteness of uniparental inheritance is increasingly questioned. Here, we review the field and propose a unifying model for organelle inheritance. We argue that the predominance of the maternal mode is a result of higher mutational load in the paternal gamete. Uniparental inheritance evolved from relaxed organelle inheritance patterns because it avoids the spread of selfish cytoplasmic elements. However, on evolutionary timescales, uniparentally inherited organelles are susceptible to mutational meltdown (Muller's ratchet). To prevent this, fall-back to relaxed inheritance patterns occurs, allowing low levels of sexual organelle recombination. Since sexual organelle recombination is insufficient to mitigate the effects of selfish cytoplasmic elements, various mechanisms for uniparental inheritance then evolve again independently. Organelle inheritance must therefore be seen as an evolutionary unstable trait, with a strong general bias to the uniparental, maternal, mode.
    BioEssays 10/2014; · 4.84 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A common feature of most genetic sex-determination systems studied so far is that sex is determined by nonrecombining genomic regions, which can be of various sizes depending on the species. These regions have evolved independently and repeatedly across diverse groups. A number of such sex-determining regions (SDRs) have been studied in animals, plants, and fungi, but very little is known about the evolution of sexes in other eukaryotic lineages.
    Current Biology 08/2014; 24(17):1945-1957. · 9.92 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
187 Downloads
Available from
Jun 3, 2014