Inbreeding avoidance

Last updated

Inbreeding avoidance, or the inbreeding avoidance hypothesis, is a concept in evolutionary biology that refers to the prevention of the deleterious effects of inbreeding. Animals only rarely exhibit inbreeding avoidance. [1] The inbreeding avoidance hypothesis posits that certain mechanisms develop within a species, or within a given population of a species, as a result of assortative mating and natural and sexual selection, in order to prevent breeding among related individuals. Although inbreeding may impose certain evolutionary costs, inbreeding avoidance, which limits the number of potential mates for a given individual, can inflict opportunity costs. [2] Therefore, a balance exists between inbreeding and inbreeding avoidance. This balance determines whether inbreeding mechanisms develop and the specific nature of such mechanisms. [3]

Contents

A 2007 study showed that inbred mice had significantly reduced survival when they were reintroduced into a natural habitat. [4]

Inbreeding can result in inbreeding depression, which is the reduction of fitness of a given population due to inbreeding. Inbreeding depression occurs via appearance of disadvantageous traits due to the pairing of deleterious recessive alleles in a mating pair's progeny. [5] When two related individuals mate, the probability of deleterious recessive alleles pairing in the resulting offspring is higher as compared to when non-related individuals mate because of increased homozygosity. However, inbreeding also gives opportunity for genetic purging of deleterious alleles that otherwise would continue to exist in population and could potentially increase in frequency over time. Another possible negative effect of inbreeding is weakened immune system due to less diverse immunity alleles as a result of outbreeding depression. [6]

A review of the genetics of inbreeding depression in wild animal and plant populations, as well as in humans, led to the conclusion that inbreeding depression and its opposite, heterosis (hybrid vigor), are predominantly caused by the presence of recessive deleterious alleles in populations. [7] Inbreeding, including self-fertilization in plants and automictic parthenogenesis (thelytoky) in hymenoptera, tends to lead to the harmful expression of deleterious recessive alleles (inbreeding depression). Cross-fertilization between unrelated individuals ordinarily leads to the masking of deleterious recessive alleles in progeny. [8] [9]

Many studies have demonstrated that homozygous individuals are often disadvantaged with respect to heterozygous individuals. [10] For example, a study conducted on a population of South African cheetahs demonstrated that the lack of genetic variability among individuals in the population has resulted in negative consequences for individuals, such as a greater rate of juvenile mortality and spermatozoal abnormalities. [11] When heterozygotes possess a fitness advantage relative to a homozygote, a population with a large number of homozygotes will have a relatively reduced fitness, thus leading to inbreeding depression. Through these described mechanisms, the effects of inbreeding depression are often severe enough to cause the evolution of inbreeding avoidance mechanisms. [12]

Mechanisms

Inbreeding avoidance mechanisms have evolved in response to selection against inbred offspring. Inbreeding avoidance occurs in nature by at least four mechanisms: kin recognition, dispersal, extra-pair/extra-group copulations, and delayed maturation/reproductive suppression. [3] [12] These mechanisms are not mutually exclusive and more than one can occur in a population at a given time.

Kin recognition

Golden hamsters have been shown to use their own phenotypes as a template in order to differentiate between kin and non-kin via olfaction. Peach the pet hamster.jpg
Golden hamsters have been shown to use their own phenotypes as a template in order to differentiate between kin and non-kin via olfaction.
Mean time (+-s.d.) females spent courting in front of the non-kin (left bars) and brothers (right bars). Given is the time females spent in the choice zone measuring 7x19 cm in front of the males' compartments for outbred (n=9) and inbred fish (n=7) as well as for all females (n=16). Each test lasted 1800 s. n.s., non-significant, **p<0.01. Kin recognition Frommen and Baker.large.jpg
Mean time (±s.d.) females spent courting in front of the non-kin (left bars) and brothers (right bars). Given is the time females spent in the choice zone measuring 7×19 cm in front of the males' compartments for outbred (n=9) and inbred fish (n=7) as well as for all females (n=16). Each test lasted 1800 s. n.s., non-significant, **p<0.01.

Kin recognition is the mechanism by which individuals identify and avoid mating with closely related conspecifics. There have been numerous documented examples of instances in which individuals are shown to find closely related conspecifics unattractive. In one set of studies, researchers formed artificial relative and non-relative mate-pairs (artificial meaning they preferentially paired individuals to mate for the purposes of the experiments) and compared the reproductive results of the two groups. In these studies, paired relatives demonstrated reduced reproduction and higher mating reluctance when compared with non-relatives. [12] [13] [14] [15] For example, in a study by Simmons in field crickets, female crickets exhibited greater mating latency for paired siblings and half-siblings than with non-siblings. [13] In another set of studies, researchers allowed individuals to choose their mates from conspecifics that lie on a spectrum of relatedness. In this set, individuals were more likely to choose non-related over related conspecifics. [12] [14] [16] For example, in a study by Krackow et al., male wild house mice were set up in an arena with four separate openings leading to cages with bedding from conspecifics. The conspecifics exhibited a range of relatedness to the test subjects, and the males significantly preferred the bedding of non-siblings to the bedding of related females. [14]

Studies have shown that kin recognition is more developed in species in which dispersal patterns facilitate frequent adult kin encounters. [12]

There is a significant amount of variation in the mechanisms used for kin recognition. These mechanisms include recognition based on association or familiarity, an individual's own phenotypic cues, chemical cues, and the MHC genes. In association/familiarity mechanisms, individuals learn the phenotypic profiles of their kin and use this template for kin recognition. [12] Many species accomplish this by becoming "familiar" with their siblings, litter mates, or nestmates. These species rely on offspring being reared in close proximity to achieve kin recognition. This is called the Westermarck effect. [17] For example, Holmes and Sherman conducted a comparative study in Arctic ground squirrels and Belding's ground squirrels. They manipulated the reared groups to include both siblings and cross-fostered nestmates and found that in both species the individuals were equally aggressive toward their nestmates, regardless of kinship. [18] In certain species where social groups are highly stable, relatedness and association between infants and other individuals are usually highly correlated. [12] [19] Therefore, degree of association can be used as a meter for kin recognition.

Individuals can also use their own characteristics or phenotype as a template in kin recognition. For example, in one study, Mateo and Johnston had golden hamsters reared with only non-kin then later had them differentiate between odors of related and non-related individuals without any postnatal encounters with kin. The hamsters were able to discriminate between the odors, demonstrating the use of their own phenotype for the purpose of kin recognition. [20] This study also provides an example of a species utilizing chemical cues for kin recognition.

The major histocompatibility complex genes, or MHC genes, have been implicated in kin recognition. [21] One idea is that the MHC genes code for a specific pheromone profile for each individual, which are used to discriminate between kin and non-kin conspecifics. Several studies have demonstrated the involvement of the MHC genes in kin recognition. For example, Manning et al. conducted a study in house mice that looked at the species's behavior of communal nesting, or nursing one's own pups as well as the pups of other individuals. As Manning et al. state, kin selection theory predicts that the house mice will selectively nurse the pups of their relatives in order to maximize inclusive fitness. Manning et al. demonstrate that the house mice utilize the MHC genes in the process of discriminating between kin by preferring individuals who share the same allelic forms the MHC genes. [22]

Human kin recognition

The possible use of olfaction-biased mechanisms in human kin recognition and inbreeding avoidance was examined in three different types of study. [23] The results indicated that olfaction may help mediate the development during childhood of incest avoidance (the Westermarck effect).

Post-copulatory inbreeding avoidance in mice

Experiments using in vitro fertilization in the mouse, provided evidence of sperm selection at the gametic level. [24] When sperm of sibling and non-sibling males were mixed, a fertilization bias towards the sperm of the non-sibling males was observed. The results were interpreted as egg-driven sperm selection against related sperm.

Inbreeding avoidance in plants

Experiments were performed with the dioecious plant Silene latifolia to test whether post-pollination selection favors less related pollen donors and reduces inbreeding. [25] The results showed that in S. latifolia, and presumably in other plant systems with inbreeding depression, pollen or embryo selection after multiple-donor pollination may reduce inbreeding.

Dispersal

In Gombe Stream National Park, male chimpanzees remain in their natal community while females disperse to other groups. Gombe Stream NP Mutter und Kind.jpg
In Gombe Stream National Park, male chimpanzees remain in their natal community while females disperse to other groups.
The likelihood of mating with kin decreases with respect to natal dispersal distance (m). The bold line shows the fitted values where natal dispersal distance was fitted as a predictor to inbreeding (f>=0.03125); dashed lines show the 95% confidence interval for the fit. The horizontal line represents the overall population average likelihood of inbreeding. F3.large.jpg
The likelihood of mating with kin decreases with respect to natal dispersal distance (m). The bold line shows the fitted values where natal dispersal distance was fitted as a predictor to inbreeding (f≥0.03125); dashed lines show the 95% confidence interval for the fit. The horizontal line represents the overall population average likelihood of inbreeding.

Some species will adopt dispersal as a way to separate close relatives and prevent inbreeding. [12] The initial dispersal route species may take is known as natal dispersal, whereby individuals move away from the area of birth. Subsequently, species may then resort to breeding dispersal, whereby individuals move from one non-natal group to another. Nelson-Flower et al. (2012) conducted a study on southern pied babblers and found that individuals may travel farther distances from natal groups than from non-natal groups. [26] This may be attributed to the possibility of encountering kin within local ranges when dispersing. The extent to which an individual in a particular species will disperse depends on whether the benefits of dispersing can outweigh both the costs of inbreeding and the costs of dispersal. Long‐distance movements can bear mortality risks and energetic costs. [27]

Sex-biased dispersal

In many cases of dispersal, one sex shows a greater tendency to disperse from their natal area than the opposite sex. [28] The extent of bias for a particular sex is dependent on numerous factors which include, but are not limited to: mating system, social organization, inbreeding and dispersal costs, and physiological factors. [27] [28] [29] [30] When the costs and benefits of dispersal are symmetric for both males and females, then no sex-biased dispersal is expected to be observed in species. [27]

Female dispersal

Birds tend to adopt monogamous mating systems in which the males remain in their natal groups to defend familiar territories with high resource quality. [28] Females generally have high energy expenditure when producing offspring, therefore inbreeding is costly for the females in terms of offspring survival and reproductive success. Females will then benefit more by dispersing and choosing amongst these territorial males. In addition, according to the Oedipus hypothesis, daughters of female birds can cheat their mothers through brood parasitism, therefore females will evict the females from the nest, forcing their daughters to disperse. Female dispersal is not seen only in birds; males may remain philopatric in mammals when the average adult male residency in a breeding group exceeds the average age for female maturation and conception. [30] For example, in a community of chimpanzees in Gombe National Park, males tend to remain in their natal community for the duration of their lives, while females typically move to other communities as soon as they reach maturity. [31]

Male dispersal

Male dispersal is more common in mammals with cooperative breeding and polygynous systems. Australian marsupial juvenile males have a greater tendency to disperse from their natal groups, while the females remain philopatric. [32] In Antechinus , this is due to the fact that males die immediately after mating; therefore when they disperse to mate, they often meet with female natal groups with zero males present. Furthermore, the Oedipus hypothesis also states that fathers in polygynous systems will evict sons with the potential to cuckold them. [28] Polygynous mating systems also influence intrasexual competition between males, where in cases where males can guard multiple females and exert their dominance, subordinate males are often forced to disperse to other non-natal groups.

When species adopt alternative inbreeding avoidance mechanisms, they can indirectly influence whether a species will disperse. Their choice for non-natal group males then selects for male dispersal.

Delayed maturation

The delayed sexual maturation of offspring in the presence of parents is another mechanism by which individuals avoid inbreeding. Delayed maturation scenarios can involve the removal of the original, opposite-sex parent, as is the case in female lions that exhibit estrus earlier following the replacement of their fathers with new males. Another form of delayed maturation involves parental presence that inhibits reproductive activity, such as in mature marmosets offspring that are reproductively suppressed in the presence of opposite sex parents and siblings in their social groups. [12] Reproductive suppression occurs when sexually mature individuals in a group are prevented from reproducing due to behavioral or chemical stimuli from other group members that suppress breeding behavior. [33] Social cues from the surrounding environment often dictate when reproductive activity is suppressed and involves interactions between same-sex adults. If the current conditions for reproduction are unfavorable, such as when presented with only inbreeding as a means to reproduce, individuals may increase their lifetime reproductive success by timing their reproductive attempts to occur during more favorable conditions. This can be achieved by individuals suppressing their reproductive activity in poor reproduction conditions.

Inbreeding avoidance between philopatric offspring and their parents/siblings severely restricts breeding opportunities of subordinates living in their social groups. A study by O'Riain et al. (2000) examined meerkats social groups and factors affecting reproductive suppression in subordinate females. They found that in family groups, the absence of a dominant individual of either sex led to reproductive quiescence. Reproductive activity only resumed upon another sexually mature female obtaining dominance, and immigration of an unrelated male. Reproduction required both the presence of an unrelated opposite-sex partner, which acted as appropriate stimulus on reproductively suppressed subordinates that were quiescent in the presence of the original dominant individual. [33]

DNA analysis has shown that 60% of offspring in splendid fairywrens nests were sired through extra-pair copulations, rather than from resident males. Malurus splendens -Yangebup, Western Australia, Australia -male-8.jpg
DNA analysis has shown that 60% of offspring in splendid fairywrens nests were sired through extra-pair copulations, rather than from resident males.

Extra-pair copulations

In various species, females benefit by mating with multiple males, thus producing more offspring of higher genetic diversity and potentially quality. Females that are pair bonded to a male of poor genetic quality, as can be the case in inbreeding, are more likely to engage in extra-pair copulations in order to improve their reproductive success and the survivability of their offspring. [34] This improved quality in offspring is generated from either the intrinsic effects of good genes, or from interactions between compatible genes from the parents. In inbreeding, loss of heterozygosity contributes to the overall decreased reproductive success, but when individuals engage in extra-pair copulations, mating between genetically dissimilar individuals leads to increased heterozygosity. [35]

Extra-pair copulations involve a number of costs and benefits for both male and female animals. For males, extra-pair copulation involves spending more time away from the original pairing in search of other females. This risks the original female being fertilized by other males while the original male is searching for partners, leading to a loss of paternity. The tradeoff for this cost depends entirely on whether the male is able to fertilize the other females’ eggs in the extra-pair copulation. For females, extra-pair copulations ensure egg fertilization, and provide enhanced genetic variety with compatible sperm that avoid expression of damaging recessive genes that come with inbreeding. [36] Through extra-pair mating, females are able to maximize the genetic variability of their offspring, providing protection against environmental changes that may otherwise target more homozygous populations that inbreeding often produces. [37]

Whether a female engages in extra-pair copulations for the sake of inbreeding avoidance depends on whether the costs of extra-pair copulation outweigh the costs of inbreeding. In extra-pair copulations, both inbreeding costs and pair-bond male loss (leading to the loss of paternal care) must be considered with the benefits of reproductive success that extra-pair copulation provides. When paternal care is absent or has little influence on offspring survivability, it is generally favorable for females to engage in extra-pair mating to increase reproductive success and avoid inbreeding. [34]

Gaps

Inbreeding avoidance has been studied via three main methods: (1) observing individual behavior in the presence and absence of close kin, (2) contrasting costs of avoidance with costs of tolerating close inbreeding, and (3) comparing observed and random frequencies of close inbreeding. [38] No method is perfect, giving rise to questions about the completeness and consistency of the inbreeding avoidance hypothesis. [38] [39] Although the first option, individual behavioral observation, is preferred and most widely used, there is still debate over whether it can provide definitive evidence for inbreeding avoidance.

A majority of the literature on inbreeding avoidance was published at least 15 years ago, allowing for growth and development of the study through contemporary experimental methods and technology. Molecular techniques such as DNA fingerprinting have become more advanced and accessible, improving the efficiency and accuracy of measuring relatedness. [12] Studying inbreeding avoidance in carnivores has garnered increased interest due to ongoing work to explain their social behaviors. [40]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Vertebrate</span> Subphylum of chordates with backbones

Vertebrates are deuterostomal animals with bony or cartilaginous axial endoskeleton — known as the vertebral column, spine or backbone — around and along the spinal cord, including all fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals. The vertebrates consist of all the taxa within the subphylum Vertebrata and represent the overwhelming majority of the phylum Chordata, with currently about 69,963 species described.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Inbreeding</span> Reproduction by closely related organisms

Inbreeding is the production of offspring from the mating or breeding of individuals or organisms that are closely related genetically. By analogy, the term is used in human reproduction, but more commonly refers to the genetic disorders and other consequences that may arise from expression of deleterious recessive traits resulting from incestuous sexual relationships and consanguinity. Animals avoid inbreeding only rarely.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Behavioral ecology</span> Study of the evolutionary basis for animal behavior due to ecological pressures

Behavioral ecology, also spelled behavioural ecology, is the study of the evolutionary basis for animal behavior due to ecological pressures. Behavioral ecology emerged from ethology after Niko Tinbergen outlined four questions to address when studying animal behaviors: What are the proximate causes, ontogeny, survival value, and phylogeny of a behavior?

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sperm competition</span> Reproductive process

Sperm competition is the competitive process between spermatozoa of two or more different males to fertilize the same egg during sexual reproduction. Competition can occur when females have multiple potential mating partners. Greater choice and variety of mates increases a female's chance to produce more viable offspring. However, multiple mates for a female means each individual male has decreased chances of producing offspring. Sperm competition is an evolutionary pressure on males, and has led to the development of adaptations to increase male's chance of reproductive success. Sperm competition results in a sexual conflict between males and females. Males have evolved several defensive tactics including: mate-guarding, mating plugs, and releasing toxic seminal substances to reduce female re-mating tendencies to cope with sperm competition. Offensive tactics of sperm competition involve direct interference by one male on the reproductive success of another male, for instance by mate guarding or by physically removing another male's sperm prior to mating with a female. For an example, see Gryllus bimaculatus.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Molecular ecology</span> Field of evolutionary biology

Molecular ecology is a field of evolutionary biology that is concerned with applying molecular population genetics, molecular phylogenetics, and more recently genomics to traditional ecological questions. It is virtually synonymous with the field of "Ecological Genetics" as pioneered by Theodosius Dobzhansky, E. B. Ford, Godfrey M. Hewitt, and others. These fields are united in their attempt to study genetic-based questions "out in the field" as opposed to the laboratory. Molecular ecology is related to the field of conservation genetics.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Animal sexual behaviour</span> Sexual behavior of non-human animals

Animal sexual behaviour takes many different forms, including within the same species. Common mating or reproductively motivated systems include monogamy, polygyny, polyandry, polygamy and promiscuity. Other sexual behaviour may be reproductively motivated or non-reproductively motivated.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fish reproduction</span> Reproductive physiology of fishes

Fish reproductive organs include testes and ovaries. In most species, gonads are paired organs of similar size, which can be partially or totally fused. There may also be a range of secondary organs that increase reproductive fitness. The genital papilla is a small, fleshy tube behind the anus in some fishes, from which the sperm or eggs are released; the sex of a fish can often be determined by the shape of its papilla.

Inbreeding depression is the reduced biological fitness that has the potential to result from inbreeding. The loss of genetic diversity that is seen due to inbreeding, results from small population size. Biological fitness refers to an organism's ability to survive and perpetuate its genetic material. Inbreeding depression is often the result of a population bottleneck. In general, the higher the genetic variation or gene pool within a breeding population, the less likely it is to suffer from inbreeding depression, though inbreeding and outbreeding depression can simultaneously occur.

Philopatry is the tendency of an organism to stay in or habitually return to a particular area. The causes of philopatry are numerous, but natal philopatry, where animals return to their birthplace to breed, may be the most common. The term derives from the Greek roots philo, "liking, loving" and patra, "fatherland", although in recent years the term has been applied to more than just the animal's birthplace. Recent usage refers to animals returning to the same area to breed despite not being born there, and migratory species that demonstrate site fidelity: reusing stopovers, staging points, and wintering grounds.

Canine reproduction is the process of sexual reproduction in domestic dogs, wolves, coyotes and other canine species.

Cooperative breeding is a social system characterized by alloparental care: offspring receive care not only from their parents, but also from additional group members, often called helpers. Cooperative breeding encompasses a wide variety of group structures, from a breeding pair with helpers that are offspring from a previous season, to groups with multiple breeding males and females (polygynandry) and helpers that are the adult offspring of some but not all of the breeders in the group, to groups in which helpers sometimes achieve co-breeding status by producing their own offspring as part of the group's brood. Cooperative breeding occurs across taxonomic groups including birds, mammals, fish, and insects.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mate choice</span> One of the primary mechanisms under which evolution can occur

Mate choice is one of the primary mechanisms under which evolution can occur. It is characterized by a "selective response by animals to particular stimuli" which can be observed as behavior. In other words, before an animal engages with a potential mate, they first evaluate various aspects of that mate which are indicative of quality—such as the resources or phenotypes they have—and evaluate whether or not those particular trait(s) are somehow beneficial to them. The evaluation will then incur a response of some sort.

<i>Stegodyphus lineatus</i> Species of spider

Stegodyphus lineatus is the only European species of the spider genus Stegodyphus. Male S. lineatus can grow up to 12 mm long while females can grow up to 15 mm. The colour can range from whitish to almost black. In most individuals the opisthosoma is whitish with two broad black longitudinal stripes. Males and females look similar, but the male is generally richer in contrast and has a bulbous forehead. The species name refers to the black lines on the back of these spiders. S. lineatus is found in the southern Mediterranean region of Europe and as far east as Tajikistan.

Kin recognition, also called kin detection, is an organism's ability to distinguish between close genetic kin and non-kin. In evolutionary biology and psychology, such an ability is presumed to have evolved for inbreeding avoidance, though animals do not typically avoid inbreeding.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Southern pied babbler</span> Species of bird

The southern pied babbler is a species of bird in the family Leiothrichidae, found in dry savannah of Botswana, Namibia, South Africa, and Zimbabwe.

Bateman's principle, in evolutionary biology, is that in most species, variability in reproductive success is greater in males than in females. It was first proposed by Angus John Bateman (1919–1996), an English geneticist. Bateman suggested that, since males are capable of producing millions of sperm cells with little effort, while females invest much higher levels of energy in order to nurture a relatively small number of eggs, the female plays a significantly larger role in their offspring's reproductive success. Bateman's paradigm thus views females as the limiting factor of parental investment, over which males will compete in order to copulate successfully.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Evolution of eusociality</span> Origins of cooperative brood care

Eusociality evolved repeatedly in different orders of animals, notably termites and the Hymenoptera. This 'true sociality' in animals, in which sterile individuals work to further the reproductive success of others, is found in termites, ambrosia beetles, gall-dwelling aphids, thrips, marine sponge-dwelling shrimp, naked mole-rats, and many genera in the insect order Hymenoptera. The fact that eusociality has evolved so often in the Hymenoptera, but remains rare throughout the rest of the animal kingdom, has made its evolution a topic of debate among evolutionary biologists. Eusocial organisms at first appear to behave in stark contrast with simple interpretations of Darwinian evolution: passing on one's genes to the next generation, or fitness, is a central idea in evolutionary biology.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Major histocompatibility complex and sexual selection</span> Adaptive immune gene selection

The major histocompatibility complex in sexual selection concerns how major histocompatibility complex (MHC) molecules allow for immune system surveillance of the population of protein molecules in a host's cells. In 1976, Yamazaki et al. demonstrated a sexual selection mate choice by male mice for females of a different MHC.

Inbreeding in fish is the mating of closely related individuals, leading to an increase in homozygosity. Repeated inbreeding generally leads to morphological abnormalities and a reduction in fitness in the offspring. In the wild, fish have a number of ways to avoid inbreeding, both before and after copulation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Primate sociality</span>

Primate sociality is an area of primatology that aims to study the interactions between three main elements of a primate social network: the social organisation, the social structure and the mating system. The intersection of these three structures describe the socially complex behaviours and relationships occurring among adult males and females of a particular species. Cohesion and stability of groups are maintained through a confluence of factors, including: kinship, willingness to cooperate, frequency of agonistic behaviour, or varying intensities of dominance structures.

References

  1. ↑ de Boer, Raïssa A.; Vega-Trejo, Regina; Kotrschal, Alexander; Fitzpatrick, John L. (July 2021). "Meta-analytic evidence that animals rarely avoid inbreeding". Nature Ecology & Evolution. 5 (7): 949–964. Bibcode:2021NatEE...5..949D. doi:10.1038/s41559-021-01453-9. ISSN   2397-334X. PMID   33941905. S2CID   233718913.
  2. ↑ Waser PM, Austad SN, Keane B (1986). "When should animals tolerate inbreeding?". American Naturalist. 128 (4): 529–537. doi:10.1086/284585. S2CID   84806782.
  3. 1 2 Archie EA, Hollister-Smith JA, Poole JH, Lee PC, Moss CJ, Maldonado JE, Alberts SC (2007). "Behavioural inbreeding avoidance in wild African elephants". Molecular Ecology. 16 (19): 4138–4148. Bibcode:2007MolEc..16.4138A. doi:10.1111/j.1365-294x.2007.03483.x. PMID   17784925. S2CID   1535829.
  4. ↑ Jiménez JA, Hughes KA, Alaks G, Graham L, Lacy RC (October 1994). "An experimental study of inbreeding depression in a natural habitat". Science. 266 (5183): 271–273. Bibcode:1994Sci...266..271J. doi:10.1126/science.7939661. PMID   7939661.
  5. ↑ Mohammad Afzal (January 1983). "Consanguinity effects on Intelligence Quotient and neonatal behaviors of Ansari muslim children".
  6. ↑ Sommer, S. (2005). "The importance of immune gene variability (MHC) in evolutionary ecology and conservation". Frontiers in Zoology. 2: 16. doi: 10.1186/1742-9994-2-16 . PMC   1282567 . PMID   16242022.
  7. ↑ Charlesworth D, Willis JH (2009). "The genetics of inbreeding depression". Nat. Rev. Genet. 10 (11): 783–96. doi:10.1038/nrg2664. PMID   19834483. S2CID   771357.
  8. ↑ Bernstein H, Hopf FA, Michod RE (1987). "The Molecular Basis of the Evolution of Sex". Molecular Genetics of Development. Advances in Genetics. Vol. 24. pp. 323–70. doi:10.1016/s0065-2660(08)60012-7. ISBN   9780120176243. PMID   3324702.
  9. ↑ Michod, R.E. (1994). "Eros and Evolution: A Natural Philosophy of Sex" Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Reading, Massachusetts. ISBN   978-0201442328
  10. ↑ Crnokrak P, Roff DA (1999). "Inbreeding depression in the wild". Heredity. 83 (3): 260–270. doi: 10.1038/sj.hdy.6885530 . PMID   10504423.
  11. ↑ O'Brien SJ, Roelke ME, Marker L (1985). "Genetic basis for species vulnerability in the cheetah". Science. 227 (4693): 1428–1434. Bibcode:1985Sci...227.1428O. doi:10.1126/science.2983425. PMID   2983425. S2CID   14341795.
  12. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Pusey A, Wolf M (1996). "Inbreeding avoidance in animals". Trends Ecol Evol. 11 (5): 201–206. Bibcode:1996TEcoE..11..201P. doi:10.1016/0169-5347(96)10028-8. PMID   21237809.
  13. 1 2 Simmons, L.W. (1989) Kin recognition and its influence on mating preferences of the field cricket, Gryffus bimaculatus (de Geer), Anim. Behav. 38,68-77
  14. 1 2 3 Krackow, S. and Matuschak, B. (1991) Mate choice for non-siblings in wild house mice: evidence from a choice test and a reproductive test, Ethology 88,99-108
  15. ↑ Bollinger, E.K. et al. (1991) Avoidance of inbreeding in the meadow vole (Microtus pennsylvanicus), .I Mammal. 72, 419-421
  16. ↑ Keane, B. (1990) The effect of relatedness on reproductive success and mate choice in the white-footed mouse, Peromyscus leucopus, Anim. Behav. 39,264-273
  17. ↑ Wolf, A.P. Westermarck Redivivus. Annual Review of Anthropology 22: 157-175, 1993
  18. ↑ Holmes WG, Sherman PW (1982) The ontogeny of kin recognition in two species of ground squirrels. American Zoologist, 22,491?517.
  19. ↑ Pusey, A.E. (1990) Mechanisms of inbreeding avoidance in nonhuman primates, in Pedophilia: Biosocial Dimensions (Feirman, J.R., ed.), pp. 201-220, Springer-Verlag
  20. ↑ Mateo JM, Johnston RE (2000) Kin recognition and the ‘armpit effect’: evidence of self-referent phenotype matching. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 267, 695?700.
  21. ↑ Jerram L. Brown and Amy Eklund The American Naturalist Vol. 143, No. 3 (Mar., 1994), pp. 435-461 Published by: The University of Chicago Press
  22. ↑ Manning CJ, Wakeland EK, Potts WK (1992). "Communal nesting patterns in mice implicate MHC genes in kin recognition". Nature. 360 (6404): 581–583. Bibcode:1992Natur.360..581M. doi:10.1038/360581a0. PMID   1461279. S2CID   4335928.
  23. ↑ Weisfeld GE, Czilli T, Phillips KA, Gall JA, Lichtman CM (2003). "Possible olfaction-based mechanisms in human kin recognition and inbreeding avoidance". J Exp Child Psychol. 85 (3): 279–95. doi:10.1016/s0022-0965(03)00061-4. PMID   12810039.
  24. ↑ Firman RC, Simmons LW (2015). "Gametic interactions promote inbreeding avoidance in house mice". Ecol. Lett. 18 (9): 937–43. Bibcode:2015EcolL..18..937F. doi:10.1111/ele.12471. PMID   26154782.
  25. ↑ Teixeira S, Foerster K, Bernasconi G (2009). "Evidence for inbreeding depression and post-pollination selection against inbreeding in the dioecious plant Silene latifolia". Heredity (Edinb). 102 (2): 101–12. doi: 10.1038/hdy.2008.86 . PMID   18698334.
  26. ↑ Nelson-Flower MJ, Hockey PA, O'Ryan C, Ridley AR (2012). "Inbreeding avoidance mechanisms: dispersal dynamics in cooperatively breeding southern pied babblers". Journal of Animal Ecology. 81 (4): 876–883. Bibcode:2012JAnEc..81..876N. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2656.2012.01983.x . PMID   22471769.
  27. 1 2 3 Perrin N, Mazalov V (1999). "Dispersal and inbreeding avoidance". The American Naturalist. 154 (3): 282–292. doi:10.1086/303236. PMID   10506544. S2CID   42975760.
  28. 1 2 3 4 Pusey AE (1987). "Sex-biased dispersal and inbreeding avoidance in birds and mammals". Trends in Ecology & Evolution. 2 (10): 295–299. Bibcode:1987TEcoE...2..295P. doi:10.1016/0169-5347(87)90081-4. PMID   21227869.
  29. ↑ Lehmann L, Perrin N (2003). "Inbreeding avoidance through kin recognition: choosy females boost male dispersal". The American Naturalist. 162 (5): 638–652. doi:10.1086/378823. PMID   14618541. S2CID   25356698.
  30. 1 2 Clutton-Brock TH (1989). "Female transfer and inbreeding avoidance in social mammals". Nature. 337 (6202): 70–72. Bibcode:1989Natur.337...70C. doi:10.1038/337070a0. PMID   2909891. S2CID   4343108.
  31. ↑ Pusey AE (1980). "Inbreeding avoidance in chimpanzees". Animal Behaviour. 28 (2): 543–552. doi:10.1016/s0003-3472(80)80063-7. S2CID   53164905.
  32. ↑ Cockburn A, Scott MP, Scotts DJ (1985). "Inbreeding avoidance and male-biased natal dispersal in Antechinus spp. (Marsupialia: Dasyuridae)". Animal Behaviour. 33 (3): 908–915. doi:10.1016/s0003-3472(85)80025-7. S2CID   53206203.
  33. 1 2 O'Riain MJ, Bennett NC, Brotherton PN, McIlrath GM, Clutton-Brock TH (2000b). "Reproductive suppression and inbreeding avoidance in wild populations of co-operatively breeding meerkats Suricata suricatta". Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 48 (6): 471–477. doi:10.1007/s002650000249. S2CID   25928636.
  34. 1 2 Petrie M, Kempenaers B (1998). "Extra-pair paternity in birds: Explaining variation between species and populations". Trends in Ecology and Evolution. 13 (2): 52–57. Bibcode:1998TEcoE..13...52P. doi:10.1016/s0169-5347(97)01232-9. PMID   21238200.
  35. ↑ Foerster K, Delhey K, Johnsen A, Lifjeld JT, Kempenaers B (Oct 2003). "Females increase offspring heterozygosity and fitness through extra-pair matings". Nature. 425 (6959): 714–7. Bibcode:2003Natur.425..714F. doi:10.1038/nature01969. PMID   14562103. S2CID   4311810.
  36. ↑ Alcock, John. 1998. Animal Behavior. Sixth Edition. 429-519.
  37. ↑ Morell S (1998). "A new look at monogamy". Science. 281 (5385): 1982–1983. doi:10.1126/science.281.5385.1982. PMID   9767050. S2CID   31391458.
  38. 1 2 Part, T. (1996). Problems with testing inbreeding avoidance: the case of the collared flycatcher. Evolution, 1625-1630.
  39. ↑ Moore J, Ali R (1984). "Are dispersal and inbreeding avoidance related?". Animal Behaviour. 32 (1): 94–112. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.584.5226 . doi:10.1016/s0003-3472(84)80328-0. S2CID   7674864.
  40. ↑ Keane B, Creel SR, Waser PM (1996). "No evidence of inbreeding avoidance or inbreeding depression in a social carnivore". Behavioral Ecology. 7 (4): 480–489. doi: 10.1093/beheco/7.4.480 .
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.