Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Letter
  • Published:

A test of the short-term advantage of sexual reproduction

Abstract

The ubiquity of sex in the face of what is called the 'cost of meiosis' represents one of the major paradoxes of evolutionary biology1–3. Theoretical work has shown that sexual females can only be maintained in mixed populations of sexual and asexual females if their offspring are of the order of twice as fit as those of asexual females1–8. Previous experiments using the grass Anthoxanthum odoratum have shown substantial fitness advantages for genetically variable arrays of individuals relative to genetically uniform arrays planted in particular experimental designs9–12. Yet, in natural conditions progeny do not become arranged at set spacings in arbitrary places within a population, but are dispersed around parents to form a 'seed shadow' with decreasing density away from source13. We report here the results of an experiment designed to simulate the natural dispersal pattern of progeny around parents when these progeny are either genetically uniform and identical to parent, or sexually-produced by those parents and genetically variable. Our data show that sexually generated progeny of Anthoxanthum odoratum have reproductive rates, summed over two years, that are 1.43 times those of their asexually generated siblings.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Williams, G. C. Sex and Evolution (Princeton University Press, New Jersey, 1975).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Maynard Smith, J. The Evolution of Sex (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1978).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bell, G. The Masterpiece of Nature: The Evolution and Genetics of Sexuality (University of California Press, Berkeley, 1982).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Charlesworth, B. J. theor. Biol. 84, 655–671 (1980).

    Article  MathSciNet  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Lloyd, D. G. Evol. Biol. 13, 69–111 (1980).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Harper, A. B. Heredity 48, 107–116 (1982).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Uyenoyama, M. K. Evolution 38, 87–102 (1985).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Uyenoyama, M. K. Evolution 39, 1194–1206 (1985).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Antonovics, J. & Ellstrand, N. C. Evolution 38, 103–115 (1984).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Ellstrand, N. C. & Antonovics, J. Evolution 39, 657–666 (1985).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Schmitt, J. & Antonovics, J. Evolution 40, 830–836 (1986).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Schmitt, J. & Antonovics, J. Evolution 40, 837–842 (1986).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Levin, D. A. & Kerster, H. W. Evol. Biol. 6, 139–220 (1974).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Brownlee, K. A. Statistical Theory and Methodology (Krieger, Florida, 1984).

    Google Scholar 

  15. Maynard Smith, J. J. theor. Biol. 63, 245–258 (1976).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Taylor, P. D. J. theor. Biol. 81, 407–421 (1979).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Bulmer, M. K. J. theor. Biol. 82, 335–345 (1980).

    Article  MathSciNet  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Jaenike, J. Evol. Theory 3, 191–194 (1978).

    Google Scholar 

  19. Bremermann, H. J. J. theor. Biol. 87, 671–702 (1980).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Hamilton, W. D. Oikos 35, 282–290 (1980).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Tooby, J. J. theor. Biol. 97, 557–576 (1982).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Law, R. & Lewis, D. H. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 20, 249–276 (1983).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. May, R. M. & Anderson, R. M. Proc. R. Soc. 219, 281–313 (1983).

    ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Kelley, S. E. thesis, Duke Univ. (1985).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kelley, S., Antonovics, J. & Schmitt, J. A test of the short-term advantage of sexual reproduction. Nature 331, 714–716 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1038/331714a0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/331714a0

This article is cited by

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing