
One of my favorite studies that I have come across in my research has to do with the genetic compatibility component of my paper. Carrie is covering MHC compatibility much more in depth than me, but there is still a section of my paper where I discuss non-human studies involving MHC compatibility. Within one particular study, Agbali et. al, observed mate choice within female Rose bitterlings. Females exhibited mate preferences that were indicative of MHC dissimilarity. Because mate preference was variable depending on the MHC genes of the female, this study validates the theory that the MHC indicates genetic compatibility and not just good genes (if it was good genes, females should preferentially choose all the same mate.) However, though this is cool, the most interesting part of the study was the next step in which Agbali et. al conducted in vitro fertilization after mate selection in order to access if MHC dissimilarity has significant effects on offspring fitness. Their results indicated that there was a significant correlation between male and female genotype on offspring survival, rate of development, growth rate, and body size! These finding offer concrete evidence to my argument that olfactory cues function in sexual selection in order to selectively enhance the fitness of the offspring based on mate choice. Which is awesome within the scope of this class, but more broadly speaking, this study is revolutionary in that this is the first study I came across in my research within the field of olfactory-based sexual selection that has made the leap beyond simply observing mate preference to studying the effects of this preference on progeny fitness. I’m hoping more studies follow suit, because studies such as this help provide more concrete evidence that mate olfactory-derived mate preference selectively enhances offspring fitness instead of theorizing that based on compatible genes this would be the case. However, the findings of this study because they are based on in-vitro fertilization raise questions in particular, were the results of the fitness of the offspring different because fertilization was not natural? More broadly, how does in-vitro fertilization change both the reproductive success and offspring survival in comparison to natural fertilization? Thus, this study can also be connected to Ashley’s chapter on the effects and implications of in-vitro fertilization, which is astounding considering at first glance how the MHC in fish relates to in-vitro fertilization in humans seems far reaching! Nonetheless, I have included the link below; hopefully you find this as cool as I clearly did!
This isn’t the link where I initially found the article so it does not match my citation, but it is still the same article I promise!
Agbali M, Reichard M, Bryjová A, Bryja J, Smith C. MATE CHOICE FOR NONADDITIVE GENETIC BENEFITS CORRELATE WITH MHC DISSIMILARITY IN THE ROSE BITTERLING ( RHODEUS OCELLATUS). Evolution. June 2010;64(6):1683-1696.
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0040780