Divergent warning patterns contribute to assortative mating between incipient Heliconius species

Abstract

Theoretical models suggest that traits under divergent ecological selection, which also contribute to assortative mating, will facilitate speciation with gene flow. Evidence for these so-called “magic traits” now exists across a range of taxa. However, their importance during speciation will depend on the extent to which they contribute to reproductive isolation. Addressing this requires experiments to determine the exact cues involved as well as estimates of assortative mating in the wild. Heliconius butterflies are well known for their diversity of bright warning color patterns, and their amenability to experimental manipulation has provided an excellent opportunity to test their role in reproductive isolation. Here, we reveal that divergent color patterns contribute to mate recognition between the incipient species Heliconius himera and H. erato, a taxon pair for which assortative mating by color pattern has been demonstrated among wild individuals: First, we demonstrate that males are more likely to attempt to mate conspecific females; second, we show that males are more likely to approach pinned females that share their own warning pattern. These data are valuable as these taxa likely represent the early stages of speciation, but unusually also allow comparisons with rates of interbreeding between divergent ecologically relevant phenotypes measured in the wild.

References Bybee, S. M., F. Yuan, M. D. Ramstetter, J. Llorente-Bousquets, R. Reed, D. Osorio, et al. 2012. UV Photoreceptors and UV-yellow wing pigments in Heliconius butterflies allow a color signal to serve both mimicry and intraspecific communication. Am. Nat. 179:38–51. Conte, G. L., and D. Schluter. 2013. Experimental confirmation that body size determines mate preferences via phenotype matching in a stickleback species pair. Evolution 67:1477–1484. Davison, A., W. O. McMillan, A. Griffin, C. D. Jiggins, and J. Mallet. 1999. Behavioral and physiological differences between two parapatric Heliconius species. Biotropica 31:661–668. Estrada, C., and L. E. Gilbert. 2010. Host plants and immatures as mate searching cues in Heliconius butterflies. Anim. Behav. 80:231–239. Estrada, C., and C. D. Jiggins. 2008. Interspecific sexual attraction because of convergence in warning colouration: is there a conflict between natural and sexual selection in mimetic species? J. Evol. Biol. 21:749–760. Felsenstein, J. 1981. Skepticism towards Santa Rosalia, or why are there so few kinds of animals? Evolution, 35:124–138. Feulner, P. G. D., M. Plath, J. Engelmann, F. Kirschbaum, and R. Tiedemann. 2009. Electrifying love: electric fish use species-specific discharge for mate recognition. Biol. Lett. 5:225–228. Gavrilets, S. 2004. Fitness landscapes and the origin of species. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, NJ. Gilbert, L. E. 1976. Postmating female odor in Heliconius butterflies: a male-contributed antiaphrodisiac? Science 193:419–420. Haller, B. C., L. F. De Léon, G. Rolshausen, K. Gotander, and A. P. Hendry. 2012. Magic traits: distinguishing the important from the trivial. Trends Ecol. Evol. 27:4–5. Hawthorne, D., and S. Via. 2001. Genetic linkage of ecological specialization and reproductive isolation in pea aphids. Nature 412:904–907. Heliconius Genome Consortium. 2012. Butterfly genome reveals promiscuous exchange of mimicry adaptations among species. Nature 487:94–98. Jiggins, C. D., W. O. McMillan, W. Neukirchen, and J. Mallet. 1996. What can hybrid zones tell us about speciation? The case of Heliconius erato and H. himera (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae). Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 59:221–241. Jiggins, C. D., W. O. McMillan, P. King, and J. Mallet. 1997a. The maintenance of species differences across a Heliconius hybrid zone. Heredity 79:495–505. Jiggins, C. D., W. O. McMillan, and J. Mallet. 1997b. Host plant adaptation has not played a role in the recent speciation of Heliconius himera and Heliconius erato (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae). Ecol. Entomol. 22:361–365. Jiggins, C., R. Naisbit, R. Coe, and J. Mallet. 2001. Reproductive isolation caused by colour pattern mimicry. Nature 411:302–305. Jiggins, C., C. Estrada, and A. Rodrigues. 2004. Mimicry and the evolution of premating isolation in Heliconius melpomene Linnaeus. J. Evol. Biol. 17:680–691. Kronforst, M., L. Young, D. Kapan, C. McNeely, R. O'Neill, and L. Gilbert. 2006. Linkage of butterfly mate preference and wing color preference cue at the genomic location of wingless. PNAS 103:6575–6580. Kronforst, M. R., L. G. Young, and L. E. Gilbert. 2007. Reinforcement of mate preference among hybridizing Heliconius butterflies. J. Evol. Biol. 20:278–285. Mallet, J., and N. Barton. 1989. Strong natural selection in a warning color hybrid zone. Evolution 43:421–431. Mallet, J., W. McMillan, and C. Jiggins. 1998a. Estimating the mating behavior of a pair of hybridizing Heliconius species in the wild. Evolution 52:503–510. Mallet, J., W. O. McMillan, and C. D. Jiggins. 1998b. Mimicry and warning color at the boundary between races and species. Pp. 390–403 in D. J. Howard and S. H. Berlocher, eds. Endless forms: species and speciation. Oxford Univ. Press, New York. Martin, S., K. Dasmahapatra, N. J. Nadeau, C. Salazar, J. R. Walters, F. Simpson, et al. 2013. Genome-wide evidence for speciation with gene flow in Heliconius butterflies. Genome Res. 23:1817–1823. Maynard Smith, J. 1966. Sympatric speciation. Am. Nat. 100:637–650. McMillan, W., C. Jiggins, and J. Mallet. 1997. What initiates speciation in passion-vine butterflies? PNAS 94:8628–8633. Melo, M. C., C. A. Salazar, C. D. Jiggins, and M. Linares. 2008. Assortative mating preferences among hybrids offers a route to hybrid speciation. Evolution 63:1660–1665. Merrill, R. M., and C. D. Jiggins. 2009. Müllerian mimicry: sharing the load reduces the legwork. Curr. Biol. 19:R687–R689. Merrill, R. M., Z. Gompert, L. M. Dembeck, M. R. Kronforst, W. O. McMillan, and C. D. Jiggins. 2011a. Mate preference across the speciation continuum in a clade of mimetic butterflies. Evolution 65:1489–1500. Merrill, R. M., B. Van Schooten, J. A. Scott, and C. D. Jiggins. 2011b. Pervasive genetic associations between traits causing reproductive isolation in Heliconius butterflies. Proc. Roy. Soc. B. 278:511–518. Merrill, R. M., R. R. Wallbank, V. Bull, P. Salazar, J. Mallet, M. Stevens, et al. 2012. Disruptive ecological selection on a mating cue. Proc. Roy. Soc. B 279:4907–4913. Merrill, R. M., R. E. Naisbit, J. Mallet, and C. D. Jiggins. 2013. Ecological and genetic factors influencing the transition between host-use strategies in sympatric Heliconius butterflies. J. Evol. Biol. 26:1959–1967. Müller, F. 1879. Ituna and Thyridia; a remarkable case of mimicry in butterflies. Trans. Entomol. Soc. Lond. 1879:xx–xxix. Muñoz, A. G., C. Salazar, J. Castaño, C. D. Jiggins, and M. Linares. 2010. Multiple sources of reproductive isolation in a bimodal butterfly hybrid zone. J. Evol. Biol. 23:1312–1320. Nadeau, N. J., S. H. Martin, K. M. Kozak, C. Salazar, K. K. Dasmahapatra, J. W. Davey, et al. 2013. Genome-wide patterns of divergence and gene flow across a butterfly radiation. Mol. Ecol. 22:814–826. Nosil, P. 2012. Ecological speciation. Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, U.K. Nosil, P., and D. Schluter. 2011. The genes underlying the process of speciation. Trends Ecol. Evol. 26:160–167. Podos, J. 2001. Correlated evolution of morphology and vocal signal structure in Darwin's finches. Nature 409:185–188. Protas, M., I. Tabansky, M. Conrad, J. B. Gross, O. Vidal, C. J. Tabin, et al. 2008. Multi-trait evolution in a cave fish, Astyanax mexicanus. Evol. Dev. 10:196–209. Puebla, O., E. Bermingham, F. Guichard, and E. Whiteman. 2007. Colour pattern as a single trait driving speciation in Hypoplectrus coral reef fishes? Proc. Roy. Soc. B. 274:1265–1271. Reynolds, R. G., and B. M. Fitzpatrick. 2007. Assortative mating in poison-dart frogs based on an ecologically important trait. Evolution 61:2253–2259. Schluter, D. 2001. The ecology of adaptive radiation. Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, U.K. Servedio, M. R., and M. A. Noor. 2003. The role of reinforcement in speciation: theory and data. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 34:339–364. Servedio, M. R., S. A. Saether, and G.-P. Saetre. 2009. Reinforcement and learning. Evol. Ecol. 23:109–123. Servedio, M. R., G. S. Van Doorn, M. Kopp, A. M. Frame, and P. Nosil. 2011. Magic traits in speciation: ‘magic’ but not rare?. Trends Ecol. Evol. 26:389–397. Smadja, C. M., and R. K. Butlin. 2011. A framework for comparing processes of speciation in the presence of gene flow. Mol. Ecol. 20:5123–5140. Sweeney, A., C. Jiggins, and S. Johnsen. 2003. Polarized light as a butterfly mating signal. Nature 423:31–32. Walters, J. R., C. Stafford, T. J. Hardcastle, and C. D. Jiggins. 2012. Evaluating female remating rates in light of spermatophore degradation in Heliconius butterflies: pupal-mating monandry versus adult-mating polyandry. Ecol. Entomol. 37:257–268. Zaccardi, G., A. Kelber, M. P. Sison-Mangus, and A. D. Briscoe. 2006. Color discrimination in the red range with only one long-wavelength sensitive opsin. J. Exp. Biol. 209:1944–1955.