The role of sexual imprinting in speciation: lessons from deer mice (genus Peromyscus) The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Kay, Emily Ho. 2014. The role of sexual imprinting in speciation: lessons from deer mice (genus Peromyscus). Doctoral dissertation, Harvard University. Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:13064930 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA The role of sexual imprinting in speciation: lessons from deer mice (genus Peromyscus) A dissertation presented by Emily Ho Kay to The Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the subject of Biology Harvard University Cambridge, Massachusetts August 2014 © 2014 Emily Ho Kay All rights reserved. ! Dissertation Advisor: Professor Hopi Hoekstra Emily Ho Kay The role of sexual imprinting in speciation: lessons from deer mice (genus Peromyscus) ABSTRACT Sexual imprinting, the process of learning mate preferences at a young age, could promote speciation by reducing attraction to individuals from divergent populations or species, consequently creating or maintaining reproductive isolation. Yet, despite the documentation of sexual imprinting in many taxa, its connection to speciation has been understudied. I chose to explore the potential link between sexual imprinting and reproductive isolation and in two North American rodents—the white-footed mouse (Peromyscus leucopus) and its sister species, the cotton mouse (Peromyscus gossypinus). These species have overlapping distributions in nature, possibly allowing interbreeding and admixture. In Chapter 1, I used double-digest restriction- associated DNA sequencing to test for hybridization in sympatric natural populations and found that 1.5% of sampled individuals showed evidence of admixture yet the species have maintained genetic distinctness in sympatry. In the lab, the species hybridize when given no choice of mates but mate more readily with conspecifics, suggesting that mating preferences may prevent hybridization in the wild. In Chapter 2, I tested whether mating preferences create significant reproductive isolation. I measured mating preferences in controlled laboratory conditions and found that both species and sexes preferred conspecific to heterospecific mates in 85% of trials. I then raised offspring with foster parents of the opposite species and found that P. leucopus has a genetically-determined preference while P. gossypinus learns its preference. In Chapter 3, I tested whether sexual imprinting on parental diet could generate assortative mating within a species. I tested this hypothesis by feeding P. gossypinus parents either orange- or garlic- iii! flavored water, thereby exposing their offspring to these flavors through their parents until weaning. I tested the preferences of these offspring as adults and found that P. gossypinus, especially females, had strong assortative mating preferences. This implies that at least females learn parental dietary information and that assortative mating could evolve within a single generation. Together, my results confirm that sexual imprinting on parental traits—possibly mediated through dietary differences—can create assortative mating capable of generating sexual isolation and reducing gene flow between species. My research supports the importance of mating preferences and learning in speciation. ! iv TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 1 CHAPTER 1: Hybridization and reproductive isolation between two sympatric sister species of North American deer mice (genus Peromyscus) ............................................................................7 CHAPTER 2: Sexual isolation via sexual imprinting between P. leucopus & P. gossypinus ........ 26 CHAPTER 3: The role of sexual imprinting in diet-based assortative mating .............................. 47 CONCLUSION: ............................................................................................................................... 58 APPENDIX: Superovulation in Peromyscus .................................................................................. 61 REFERENCES: ............................................................................................................................... 79 ! ! ! ! v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I owe special thanks my advisor, Dr. Hopi Hoekstra. Without her mentorship, advice, and support throughout my Ph.D., I would not be the scientist I am. I have spent seven years in the Hoekstra lab and will always think of it as my scientific home. I would also like to thank my thesis committee members for their advice during the years: Catherine Dulac, Scott Edwards, Jonathan Losos, and Jim Mallet. Their suggestions have improved my research. I would also like to thank my lab mates who have been excellent colleagues and friends over the years. In particular, I would like to thank Dr. Brant Peterson for teaching me to program in Python and Unix (and putting up with my million questions!). I also thank my fellow lab mates Felix Baier, Nicole Bedford, Emily Jacobs-Palmer, Evan Kingsley, and Hillery Metz for comments on my thesis. My research could not have been completed without the help of many dedicated, hardworking, tolerant, and fun field assistants: Alan Chiu, Vera Domingues, Heidi Fisher, Gislene Goncalves, Alexis Harrison, Kevin Lin, Hillery Metz, Brant Peterson, and Jesse Weber. I also owe a very big thank you to Dr. Robert Sikes and his team of volunteer mouse trappers from the University of Arkansas-Little Rock. I also thank Dan Greene from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Service for his trapping assistance, Matt Aresco and the Nokuse Plantation for the use of their facilities, and the many other kind individuals who have sheltered me, let me trap mice on their property, and fed my field assistants and me during our many trips. I am also indebted to the following museums for their generous tissue loans: Museum of Comparative Zoology, Oklahoma Museum of Natural History, San Noble Museum, Texas Tech University, and the Florida Museum of Natural History. ! vi I am extremely grateful to many funding sources: Harvard University, National Science Foundation, Animal Behavior Society, American Society of Mammalogists, Putnam Expedition Grants, and the Mind, Brain, and Behavior Initiative. Finally, my family deserves special recognition. My parents, Dr. Brian Kay and Helen Kay, and my sister, Allison Kay, have supported me throughout my fun Ph.D. adventure. Finally, I’d like to thank my loving fiancé, Nigel Delaney. He has made my thesis better, and my experience in graduate school the best. ! ! vii INTRODUCTION Sexual isolation is arguably one of the most important reproductive barriers that can arise between species. It can evolve early and act strongly, and thus may create reproductive isolation that facilitates further species divergence. Comparative studies from fruit flies (Coyne and Orr 1989, 1997) and darter fish (Mendelson 2003) and have shown that sexual isolation arises more rapidly than reproductive barriers that act after mating: hybrid sterility and hybrid inviability. Sexual isolation also arises faster in sympatry, suggesting that it either is required for species to co-exist or is strongly selected for in sympatry through reinforcement (Coyne and Orr 1997). In a few extreme cases, sexual isolation may be the only reproductive barrier preventing hybridization between sympatric species (e.g., Seehausen 1997; Fisher et al. 2006). Thus, because sexual isolation is an effective barrier that appears to form early during the speciation process, it is important to understand how and why sexual isolation evolves to better understand the evolution of new species. In a series of classic experiments in fruit flies, researchers discovered that sexual isolation could evolve during adaptation to new environments. After adapting populations to new media for several generations, flies no longer mated randomly (Dodd 1989; Rundle et al. 2005; Sharon et al. 2010). Instead, flies preferred to mate with individuals of the same population, creating a sexual reproductive barrier between populations raised on different media. Surprisingly, this pattern of concurrent adaptation and sexual isolation—when mating preferences increase attraction to individuals from the same population and reduce attraction to individuals from other populations—emerged between populations in just a few generations. Rapid sexual isolation during adaptation is not unique to laboratory populations of flies; it has been observed in natural ! 1 populations of additional taxa, including insects and fish (Funk 1998; Nosil et al. 2002; Mckinnon et al. 2004; Langerhans et al. 2007). The emerging field of “ecological speciation”, which focuses on the role of ecology in speciation, has argued that most sexual isolation is incidental. That is, sexual isolation is thought to evolve as a by-product of divergent natural selection (toward different optima) acting on either mating signals or preferences. In one scenario, divergent natural selection on mating signals could induce preferences for those