• We are sorry, but NCBI web applications do not support your browser and may not function properly. More information
Logo of procbhomepageaboutsubmitalertseditorial board
Proc Biol Sci. Jul 22, 1998; 265(1403): 1299–1306.
PMCID: PMC1689202

MHC-disassortative mating preferences reversed by cross-fostering.

Abstract

House mice (Mus musculus domesticus) avoid mating with individuals that are genetically similar at the major histocompatibility complex (MHC). Mice are able recognize MHC-similar individuals through specific odour cues. However, to mate disassortatively for MHC genes, individuals must have a referent, either themselves (self-inspection) or close kin (familial imprinting), with which to compare the MHC identity of potential mates. Although studies on MHC-dependent mating preferences often assume that individuals use self-inspection, laboratory experiments with male mice indicate that they use familial imprinting, i.e. males learn the MHC identity of their family and then avoid mating with females carrying 'familial' MHC alleles. To determine if female mice use familial imprinting, we cross-fostered wild-derived female mouse pups into MHC-dissimilar families, and then tested if this procedure reversed their mating preferences compared with in-fostered controls. Our observations of the female's mating behaviour in seminatural social conditions and the genetic typing of their progeny both indicated that females avoided mating with males carrying MHC genes of their foster family, supporting the familial imprinting hypothesis. We show that MHC-dependent familial imprinting potentially provides a more effective mechanism for avoiding kin matings and reducing inbreeding than self-inspection.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (331K).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
  • Apanius V, Penn D, Slev PR, Ruff LR, Potts WK. The nature of selection on the major histocompatibility complex. Crit Rev Immunol. 1997;17(2):179–224. [PubMed]
  • Beauchamp GK, Yamazaki K, Bard J, Boyse EA. Preweaning experience in the control of mating preferences by genes in the major histocompatibility complex of the mouse. Behav Genet. 1988 Jul;18(4):537–547. [PubMed]
  • Buck LB. Information coding in the vertebrate olfactory system. Annu Rev Neurosci. 1996;19:517–544. [PubMed]
  • Eklund A. The effect of early experience on MHC-based mate preferences in two B10.W strains of mice (Mus domesticus). Behav Genet. 1997 May;27(3):223–229. [PubMed]
  • Estep DQ, Lanier DL, Dewsbury DA. Copulatory behavior and nest building behavior of wild house mice (Mus musculus). Anim Learn Behav. 1975 Nov;3(4):329–336. [PubMed]
  • Fillion TJ, Blass EM. Infantile experience with suckling odors determines adult sexual behavior in male rats. Science. 1986 Feb 14;231(4739):729–731. [PubMed]
  • Harvey FE, Cowley JJ. Effects of external chemical environment on the developing olfactory bulbs of the mouse (Mus musculus). Brain Res Bull. 1984 Oct;13(4):541–547. [PubMed]
  • Hedrick PW, Black FL. HLA and mate selection: no evidence in South Amerindians. Am J Hum Genet. 1997 Sep;61(3):505–511. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Manning CJ, Wakeland EK, Potts WK. Communal nesting patterns in mice implicate MHC genes in kin recognition. Nature. 1992 Dec 10;360(6404):581–583. [PubMed]
  • Ober C, Weitkamp LR, Cox N, Dytch H, Kostyu D, Elias S. HLA and mate choice in humans. Am J Hum Genet. 1997 Sep;61(3):497–504. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Penn D, Potts W. How do major histocompatibility complex genes influence odor and mating preferences? Adv Immunol. 1998;69:411–436. [PubMed]
  • Porter RH, Moore JD. Human kin recognition by olfactory cues. Physiol Behav. 1981 Sep;27(3):493–495. [PubMed]
  • Potts WK, Wakeland EK. Evolution of MHC genetic diversity: a tale of incest, pestilence and sexual preference. Trends Genet. 1993 Dec;9(12):408–412. [PubMed]
  • Potts WK, Manning CJ, Wakeland EK. Mating patterns in seminatural populations of mice influenced by MHC genotype. Nature. 1991 Aug 15;352(6336):619–621. [PubMed]
  • Potts WK, Manning CJ, Wakeland EK. The role of infectious disease, inbreeding and mating preferences in maintaining MHC genetic diversity: an experimental test. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1994 Nov 29;346(1317):369–378. [PubMed]
  • Saha BK, Cullen SE. Molecular mapping of murine I region recombinants: crossing over in the E beta gene. J Immunol. 1986 Feb 1;136(3):1112–1116. [PubMed]
  • Sullivan Regina M, Wilson Donald A, Leon Michael. Associative Processes in Early Olfactory Preference Acquisition: Neural and Behavioral Consequences. Psychobiology (Austin, Tex) 1989;17(1):29–33. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Terry LM, Johanson IB. Effects of altered olfactory experiences on the development of infant rats' responses to odors. Dev Psychobiol. 1996 May;29(4):353–377. [PubMed]
  • Wang HW, Wysocki CJ, Gold GH. Induction of olfactory receptor sensitivity in mice. Science. 1993 May 14;260(5110):998–1000. [PubMed]
  • Wedekind C. Mate choice and maternal selection for specific parasite resistances before; during and after fertilization. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1994 Nov 29;346(1317):303–311. [PubMed]
  • Wedekind C, Füri S. Body odour preferences in men and women: do they aim for specific MHC combinations or simply heterozygosity? Proc Biol Sci. 1997 Oct 22;264(1387):1471–1479. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Wedekind C, Seebeck T, Bettens F, Paepke AJ. MHC-dependent mate preferences in humans. Proc Biol Sci. 1995 Jun 22;260(1359):245–249. [PubMed]
  • Woo CC, Coopersmith R, Leon M. Localized changes in olfactory bulb morphology associated with early olfactory learning. J Comp Neurol. 1987 Sep 1;263(1):113–125. [PubMed]
  • Yamazaki K, Boyse EA, Miké V, Thaler HT, Mathieson BJ, Abbott J, Boyse J, Zayas ZA, Thomas L. Control of mating preferences in mice by genes in the major histocompatibility complex. J Exp Med. 1976 Nov 2;144(5):1324–1335. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Yamazaki K, Yamaguchi M, Baranoski L, Bard J, Boyse EA, Thomas L. Recognition among mice. Evidence from the use of a Y-maze differentially scented by congenic mice of different major histocompatibility types. J Exp Med. 1979 Oct 1;150(4):755–760. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Yamazaki K, Beauchamp GK, Kupniewski D, Bard J, Thomas L, Boyse EA. Familial imprinting determines H-2 selective mating preferences. Science. 1988 Jun 3;240(4857):1331–1332. [PubMed]

Articles from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences are provided here courtesy of The Royal Society

Formats:

Related citations in PubMed

See reviews...See all...

Cited by other articles in PMC

See all...

Links

Recent Activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...