Haploid Selection in “Diploid” Organisms

Literature Cited

1. Alavioon G, Hotzy H, Nakhro K, Rudolf S, Scofield DG et al. 2017. Haploid selection within a single ejaculate increases offspring fitness. PNAS 114:8053–58
   [Google Scholar]
2. Ardon F, Helms D, Sahin E, Bollwein H, Topfer-Petersen E, Waberski D 2008. Chromatin-unstable boar spermatozoa have little chance of reaching oocytes in vivo. Reproduction 135:4461–70
   [Google Scholar]
3. Armbruster WS, Gobeille Rogers D 2004. Does pollen competition reduce the cost of inbreeding. Am. J. Bot. 91:111939–43
   [Google Scholar]
4. Arnqvist G, Rowe L. 2005. Sexual Conflict Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
5. Aronen T, Nikkanen T, Harju A, Tiimonen H, Häggman H 2002. Pollen competition and seed-siring success in Picea abies. Theor. Appl. Genet 104:4638–42
   [Google Scholar]
6. Arunkumar R, Josephs EB, Williamson RJ, Wright SI 2013. Pollen-specific, but not sperm-specific, genes show stronger purifying selection and higher rates of positive selection than sporophytic genes in Capsella grandiflora. Mol. Biol. Evol. 30:2475–86
   [Google Scholar]
7. Bachtrog D, Mank JE, Peichel CL, Otto SP, Kirkpatrick M et al. 2014. Sex determination: why so many ways of doing it. PLOS Biol 12:e1001899
   [Google Scholar]
8. Ballard JWO, Whitlock MC. 2004. The incomplete natural history of mitochondria. Mol. Ecol. 13:4729–44
   [Google Scholar]
9. Barr CM, Neiman M, Taylor DR 2005. Inheritance and recombination of mitochondrial genomes in plants, fungi and animals: research review. New Phytol 168:139–50
   [Google Scholar]
10. Birkhead TR, Møller AP. 1998. Sperm Competition and Sexual Selection London: Academic
11. Borg M, Brownfield L, Twell D 2009. Male gametophyte development: a molecular perspective. J. Exp. Bot. 60:51465–78
    [Google Scholar]
12. Borowsky R, Luk A, He X, Kim RS 2018. Unique sperm haplotypes are associated with phenotypically different sperm subpopulations in Astyanax fish. BMC Biol 16:72
    [Google Scholar]
13. Brockdorff N, Turner BM. 2015. Dosage compensation in mammals. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol. 7:3a019406
    [Google Scholar]
14. Caldwell KA, Handel MA. 1991. Protamine transcript sharing among postmeiotic spermatids. PNAS 88:2407–11
    [Google Scholar]
15. Carré D, Sardet C. 1984. Fertilization and early development in Beroe ovata. Dev. Biol 105:188–95
    [Google Scholar]
16. Charlesworth B. 1978. Model for evolution of Y-chromosomes and dosage compensation. PNAS 75:5618–22
    [Google Scholar]
17. Charlesworth B. 1996. The evolution of chromosomal sex determination and dosage compensation. Curr. Biol. 6:2149–62
    [Google Scholar]
18. Charlesworth B, Charlesworth D. 1987. Inbreeding depression and its evolutionary consequences. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 18:237–68
    [Google Scholar]
19. Charlesworth D, Charlesworth B. 1992. The effects of selection in the gametophytic stage on mutational load. Evolution 46:703–20
    [Google Scholar]
20. Chess A. 2012. Mechanisms and consequences of widespread random monoallelic expression. Nat. Rev. Genet. 13:421–28
    [Google Scholar]
21. Clarke HJ, Khan TN, Siddique KHM 2004. Pollen selection for chilling tolerance at hybridisation leads to improved chickpea cultivars. Euphytica 139:65–74
    [Google Scholar]
22. Cohen J. 1967. Correlation between sperm “redundancy” and chiasma frequency. Nature 215:862–63
    [Google Scholar]
23. Cohen J. 1973. Cross-overs, sperm redundancy and their close association. Heredity 31:408–13
    [Google Scholar]
24. Crow JF, Kimura M. 1965. Evolution of sexual and asexual populations. Am. Nat. 99:439–50
    [Google Scholar]
25. Crow JF, Kimura M. 1970. An Introduction to Population Genetics Theory New York: Harper & Row
26. Day T, Bonduriansky R. 2004. Intralocus sexual conflict can drive the evolution of genomic imprinting. Genetics 167:1537–46
    [Google Scholar]
27. de Vries J, Archibald JM 2018. Plastid autonomy versus nuclear control over plastid function. Plastid Genome Evolution S-M Chaw, RK Jansen 1–28 London Academic
    [Google Scholar]
28. Dean R, Zimmer F, Mank JE 2014. The potential role of sexual conflict and sexual selection in shaping the genomic distribution of mito-nuclear genes. Genome Biol. Evol. 6:51096–104
    [Google Scholar]
29. Domínguez E, Cuartero J, Fernández-Muñoz R 2005. Breeding tomato for pollen tolerance to low temperatures by gametophytic selection. Euphytica 142:253–63
    [Google Scholar]
30. Dym M, Fawcett DW. 1971. Further observations on the numbers of spermatogonia, spermatocytes, and spermatids connected by intercellular bridges in the mammalian testis. Biol. Reprod. 4:2195–215
    [Google Scholar]
31. Erickson RP. 1973. Haploid gene expression versus meiotic drive: the relevance of intercellular bridges during spermatogenesis. Nat. New Biol. 243:210–12
    [Google Scholar]
32. Erickson RP. 1990. Post-meiotic gene expression. Trends Genet 6:8264–68
    [Google Scholar]
33. Ewing E. 1977. Selection at the haploid and diploid phases: cyclical variation. Genetics 87:195–208
    [Google Scholar]
34. Ezawa K, Innan H. 2013. Competition between the sperm of a single male can increase the evolutionary rate of haploid expressed genes. Genetics 194:3709–19
    [Google Scholar]
35. Fitzpatrick JL, Baer B. 2011. Polyandry reduces sperm length variation in social insects. Evolution 65:103006–12
    [Google Scholar]
36. Good JM, Nachman MW. 2005. Rates of protein evolution are positively correlated with developmental timing of expression during mouse spermatogenesis. Mol. Biol. Evol. 22:41044–52
    [Google Scholar]
37. Good JM, Vanderpool D, Smith KL, Nachman MW 2011. Extraordinary sequence divergence at Tsga8, an X-linked gene involved in mouse spermiogenesis. Mol. Biol. Evol. 28:51675–86
    [Google Scholar]
38. Gordo I, Charlesworth B. 2000. The degeneration of asexual haploid populations and the speed of Muller's ratchet. Genetics 154:31379–87
    [Google Scholar]
39. Gossmann TI, Schmid MW, Grossniklaus U, Schmid KJ 2014. Selection-driven evolution of sex-biased genes is consistent with sexual selection in Arabidopsis thaliana. Mol. Biol. Evol 31:3574–83
    [Google Scholar]
40. Gur Y, Breitbart H. 2006. Mammalian sperm translate nuclear-encoded proteins by mitochondrial-type ribosomes. Genes Dev 20:411–16
    [Google Scholar]
41. Gur Y, Breitbart H. 2008. Protein synthesis in sperm: dialog between mitochondria and cytoplasm. Mol. Cell. Endocrinol. 282:1–245–55
    [Google Scholar]
42. Haig D. 2000. The kinship theory of genomic imprinting. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 31:9–32
    [Google Scholar]
43. Haig D, Bergstrom CT. 1995. Multiple mating, sperm competition and meiotic drive. J. Evol. Biol. 8:3265–82
    [Google Scholar]
44. Haldane JBS. 1924. A mathematical theory of natural and artificial selection. Part I. Trans. Camb. Philos. Soc. 23:219–41
    [Google Scholar]
45. Haldane JBS. 1932. The Causes of Evolution New York: Harper
46. Hartl DL. 1977. Applications of meiotic drive in animal breeding and population control. Proceedings of the International Congress on Quantitative Genetics E Pollak, O Kempthorne, TB Bailey Jr. 63–88 Ames: Iowa State Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
47. Hecht NB. 1998. Molecular mechanisms of male germ cell differentiation. BioEssays 20:7555–61
    [Google Scholar]
48. Holt WV, Van Look KJW 2004. Concepts in sperm heterogeneity, sperm selection and sperm competition as biological foundations for laboratory tests of semen quality. Reproduction 127:527–35
    [Google Scholar]
49. Honys D, Twell D. 2004. Transcriptome analyses of haploid male gametophyte development in Arabidopsis. Genome Biol 5:R85
    [Google Scholar]
50. Hough J, Immler S, Barrett SCH, Otto SP 2013. Evolutionarily stable sex ratios and mutation load. Evolution 67:71915–25
    [Google Scholar]
51. Hourcade JD, Pérez-Crespo M, Fernández-González R, Pintado B, Gutiérrez-Adán A 2010. Selection against spermatozoa with fragmented DNA after postovulatory mating depends on the type of damage. Reprod. Biol. Endocrinol. 8:9
    [Google Scholar]
52. Immler S, Arnqvist G, Otto SP 2012. Ploidally antagonistic selection maintains stable genetic polymorphism. Evolution 66:155–65
    [Google Scholar]
53. Immler S, Otto SP. 2014. Driven apart: the evolution of ploidy differences between the sexes under antagonistic selection. Am. Nat. 183:196–107
    [Google Scholar]
54. Immler S, Otto SP. 2018. The evolutionary consequences of selection at the haploid gametic stage. Am. Nat. 192:2241–49
    [Google Scholar]
55. Joseph SB, Kirkpatrick M. 2004. Haploid selection in animals. Trends Ecol. Evol. 19:11592–97
    [Google Scholar]
56. Kanippayoor RL, Alpern JHM, Moehring AJ 2013. Protamines and spermatogenesis in Drosophila and Homo sapiens. Spermatogenesis 3:2e24376
    [Google Scholar]
57. Kirkpatrick M 1994. The Evolution of Haploid-Diploid Life Cycles Lect. Math. Life Sci. 25 Providence, RI: Am. Math. Soc.
58. Kondrashov AS, Crow JF. 1991. Haploidy or diploidy: Which is better. Nature 351:314–15
    [Google Scholar]
59. Lankinen A, Maad J, Armbruster WS 2009. Pollen-tube growth rates in Collinsia heterophylla (Plantaginaceae): One-donor crosses reveal heritability but no effect on sporophytic-offspring fitness. Ann. Bot. 103:9941–50
    [Google Scholar]
60. Lenormand T. 2003. The evolution of sex dimorphism in recombination. Genetics 163:811–22
    [Google Scholar]
61. Lenormand T, Dutheil J. 2005. Recombination difference between sexes: a role for haploid selection. PLOS Biol 3:3e63
    [Google Scholar]
62. Lenz TL, Hafer N, Samonte IE, Yeates SE, Milinski M 2018. Cryptic haplotype-specific gamete selection yields offspring with optimal MHC immune genes: sperm selection for optimal immune genes. Evolution 72:112478–90
    [Google Scholar]
63. Lindsley DL, Grell EH. 1969. Spermiogenesis without chromosomes in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 61:69–78
    [Google Scholar]
64. Losdat S, Chang S-M, Reid JM 2014. Inbreeding depression in male gametic performance. J. Evol. Biol. 27:6992–1011
    [Google Scholar]
65. Lu S, Zong C, Fan W, Yang M, Li J et al. 2012. Probing meiotic recombination and aneuploidy of single sperm cells by whole-genome sequencing. Science 338:61141627–30
    [Google Scholar]
66. Lyon MF, Glenister PH, Hawker SG 1972. Do the H-2 and T-loci of the mouse have a function in the haploid phase of sperm. Nature 240:152–53
    [Google Scholar]
67. Mable BK, Otto SP. 1998. The evolution of life cycles with haploid and diploid phases. BioEssays 20:453–62
    [Google Scholar]
68. MacLaughlin J, Terner C. 1973. Ribonucleic acid synthesis by spermatozoa from the rat and hamster. Biochem. J. 133:4635–39
    [Google Scholar]
69. Manning JT, Chamberlain AT. 1994. Sib competition and sperm competitiveness: an answer to ‘why so many sperms?’ and the recombination/sperm number correlation. Proc. R. Soc. B 256:177–82
    [Google Scholar]
70. Mascarenhas JP. 1990. Gene activity during pollen development. Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol. 41:317–38
    [Google Scholar]
71. Miller D, Ostermeier GC. 2006. Towards a better understanding of RNA carriage by ejaculate spermatozoa. Hum. Reprod. Update 12:6757–67
    [Google Scholar]
72. Mulcahy DL 1975. Gamete Competition in Plants and Animals: Proceedings of the Symposium on Gamete Competition in Plants and Animals Amsterdam: North-Holland
    [Google Scholar]
73. Muller HJ, Settles F. 1927. The non-functioning of the genes in spermatozoa. Z. Indukt. Abstamm. Vererbungslehre 43:285–312
    [Google Scholar]
74. Nadeau JH. 2017. Do gametes woo? Evidence for non-random unions at fertilization. Genetics 207:2369–87
    [Google Scholar]
75. Orr HA, Otto SP. 1994. Does diploidy increase the rate of adaptation. Genetics 136:1475–80
    [Google Scholar]
76. Otto SP, Scott MF, Immler S 2015. Evolution of haploid selection in predominantly diploid organisms. PNAS 112:15952–57
    [Google Scholar]
77. Park C, Carrel L, Makova KD 2010. Strong purifying selection at genes escaping X chromosome inactivation. Mol. Biol. Evol. 27:112446–50
    [Google Scholar]
78. Parker GA. 1993. Sperm competition games: sperm size and sperm number under adult control. Proc. R. Soc. B 253:245–54
    [Google Scholar]
79. Parker GA, Begon ME. 1993. Sperm competition games: sperm size and number under gametic control. Proc. R. Soc. B 253:255–62
    [Google Scholar]
80. Pitnick S, Dobler R, Hosken DJ 2009. Sperm length is not influenced by haploid gene expression in the flies Drosophila melanogaster and Scathophaga stercoraria. Proc. R. Soc. B 276:4029–34
    [Google Scholar]
81. Podlaha O, Webb DM, Tucker PK, Zhang J 2005. Positive selection for indel substitutions in the rodent sperm protein Catsper1. Mol. Biol. Evol. 22:91845–52
    [Google Scholar]
82. Podlaha O, Zhang J. 2003. Positive selection on protein-length in the evolution of a primate sperm ion channel. PNAS 100:12241–46
    [Google Scholar]
83. Premkumar E, Bhargava PM. 1972. Transcription and translation in bovine spermatozoa. Nat. New Biol. 240:100139–43
    [Google Scholar]
84. Promerová M, Alavioon G, Tusso S, Burri R, Immler S 2017. No evidence for MHC class II-based non-random mating at the gametic haplotype in Atlantic salmon. Heredity 118:563–67
    [Google Scholar]
85. Radzvilavicius AL, Hadjivasiliou Z, Pomiankowski A, Lane N 2016. Selection for mitochondrial quality drives evolution of the germline. PLOS Biol 14:12e2000410
    [Google Scholar]
86. Ramm SA, Scharer L, Ehmcke J, Wistuba J 2014. Sperm competition and the evolution of spermatogenesis. Mol. Hum. Reprod. 20:121169–79
    [Google Scholar]
87. Reed FA, Aquadro CF. 2006. Mutation, selection and the future of human evolution. Trends Genet 22:9479–84
    [Google Scholar]
88. Reik W, Walter J. 2001. Genomic imprinting: parental influence on the genome. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2:121–32
    [Google Scholar]
89. Ren X, Chen X, Wang Z, Wang D 2017. Is transcription in sperm stationary or dynamic. J. Reprod. Dev. 63:5439–43
    [Google Scholar]
90. Romiguier J, Lourenco J, Gayral P, Faivre N, Weinert LA et al. 2014. Population genomics of eusocial insects: the costs of a vertebrate-like effective population size. J. Evol. Biol. 27:3593–603
    [Google Scholar]
91. Rossignol R, Faustin B, Rocher C, Malgat M, Mazat J-P, Letellier T 2003. Mitochondrial threshold effects. Biochem. J. 370:3751–62
    [Google Scholar]
92. Sandler G, Beaudry FEG, Barrett SCH, Wright SI 2018. The effects of haploid selection on Y chromosome evolution in two closely related dioecious plants. Evol. Lett. 2:4368–77
    [Google Scholar]
93. Sari-Gorla M, Frova C. 1997. Pollen tube growth and pollen selection. Pollen Biotechnology for Crop Production and Improvement KR Shivanna, VK Sawhney 333–51 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
94. Scott C, de Souza FF, Aristizabal VHV, Hethrington L, Krisp C et al. 2018. Proteomic profile of sex-sorted bull sperm evaluated by SWATH-MS analysis. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 198:121–28
    [Google Scholar]
95. Scott MF, Osmond MM, Otto SP 2018. Haploid selection, sex ratio bias, and transitions between sex-determining systems. PLOS Biol 16:6e2005609
    [Google Scholar]
96. Scott MF, Otto SP. 2017. Haploid selection favours suppressed recombination between sex chromosomes despite causing biased sex ratios. Genetics 207:1631–49
    [Google Scholar]
97. Scudo FM. 1967. Selection on both haplo and diplophase. Genetics 56:693–704
    [Google Scholar]
98. Sharp NP, Sandell L, James CG, Otto SP 2018. The genome-wide rate and spectrum of spontaneous mutations differ between haploid and diploid yeast. PNAS 115:E5046–55
    [Google Scholar]
99. Shoubridge EA, Wai T. 2007. Mitochondrial DNA and the mammalian oocyte. Current Topics in Developmental Biology 77 JC St. John 87–111 San Diego, CA: Academic
    [Google Scholar]
100. Singh ND, Koerich LB, Carvalho AB, Clark AG 2014. Positive and purifying selection on the Drosophila Y chromosome. Mol. Biol. Evol. 31:102612–23
     [Google Scholar]
101. Singh ND, Larracuente AM, Clark AG 2008. Contrasting the efficacy of selection on the X and autosomes in Drosophila. Mol. Biol. Evol. 25:2454–67
     [Google Scholar]
102. Snook RR, Hosken DJ, Karr TL 2011. The biology and evolution of polyspermy: insights from cellular and functional studies of sperm and centrosomal behavior in the fertilized egg. Reproduction 142:6779–92
     [Google Scholar]
103. Snow AA, Spira TP. 1996. Pollen-tube competition and male fitness in Hibiscus moscheutos. Evolution 50:51866–70
     [Google Scholar]
104. Spillane C, Schmid KJ, Laoueillé-Duprat S, Pien S, Escobar-Restrepo J-M et al. 2007. Positive darwinian selection at the imprinted MEDEA locus in plants. Nature 448:349–52
     [Google Scholar]
105. Steger K. 1999. Transcriptional and translational regulation of gene expression in haploid spermatids. Anat. Embryol. 199:6471–87
     [Google Scholar]
106. Strasburger E. 1894. The periodic reduction of the number of the chromosomes in the life-history of living organisms. Ann. Bot. 8:281–316
     [Google Scholar]
107. Strasburger E. 1905. Typische und allotypische Kernteilung. Ergebnisse und Erörterungen. Jahrb. Wiss. Bot. 42:1–71
     [Google Scholar]
108. Swanson WJ, Vacquier VD. 2002. The rapid evolution of reproductive proteins. Nat. Rev. Genet. 3:137–44
     [Google Scholar]
109. Walbot V, Evans MMS. 2003. Unique features of the plant life cycle and their consequences. Nat. Rev. Genet. 4:5369–79
     [Google Scholar]
110. Wang J, Fan HC, Behr B, Quake SR 2012. Genome-wide single cell analysis of recombination activity and de novo mutation rates in human sperm. Cell 150:2402–12
     [Google Scholar]
111. Wang S, Zhang L, Meyer E, Matz MV 2009. Construction of a high-resolution genetic linkage map and comparative genome analysis for the reef-building coral Acropora millepora. Genome Biol 10:11R126
     [Google Scholar]
112. Ward WS. 2018. Organization of sperm DNA by the nuclear matrix. Am. J. Clin. Exp. Urol. 6:287–92
     [Google Scholar]
113. Wedekind C, Chapuisat M, Macas E, Rülicke T 1996. Non-random fertilization in mice correlates with the MHC and something else. Heredity 77:400–9
     [Google Scholar]
114. Wedekind C, Walker M, Portmann J, Cenni B, Muller R, Binz T 2004. MHC-linked susceptibility to a bacterial infection, but no MHC-linked cryptic female choice in whitefish. J. Evol. Biol. 17:11–18
     [Google Scholar]
115. Xu S, Ackerman MS, Long H, Bright L, Spitze K et al. 2015. A male-specific genetic map of the microcrustacean Daphnia pulex based on single-sperm whole-genome sequencing. Genetics 201:131–38
     [Google Scholar]
116. Zamir D, Vallejos EC. 1983. Temperature effects on haploid selection of tomato microspores and pollen grains. Pollen: Biology and Implications for Plant Breeding DL Mulcahy, E Ottaviano 335–42 New York: Elsevier
     [Google Scholar]
117. Zheng Y, Deng X, Martin-DeLeon PA 2001. Lack of sharing of Spam1 (Ph-20) among mouse spermatids and transmission ratio distortion. Biol. Reprod. 64:61730–38
     [Google Scholar]