Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Nature. 2000 Mar 16;404(6775):281-5.

The ecological cost of sex.

Author information

1
Division of Biodiversity and Ecology, School of Biological Sciences, University of Southampton, UK. cpd@soton.ac.uk

Erratum in

  • Nature 2000 May 18;405(6784):376.

Abstract

Why sex prevails in nature remains one of the great puzzles of evolution. Sexual reproduction has an immediate cost relative to asexual reproduction, as males only express their contribution to population growth through females. With no males to sustain, an asexual mutant can double its relative representation in the population in successive generations. This is the widely accepted 'twofold cost of males'. Many studies have attempted to explain how sex can recoup this cost from fitness benefits associated with the recombination of parental genotypes, but these require complex biological environments that cycle over evolutionary timescales. In contrast, we have considered the ecological dynamics that govern asexual invasion. Here we show the existence of a threshold growth rate for the sexual population, above which the invasion is halted by intraspecific competition. The asexual population then exerts a weaker inhibitory effect on the carrying capacity of the sexual population than on its own carrying capacity. The stable outcome of this is coexistence on a depleted resource base. Under these ecological circumstances, longer-term benefits of sex may eventually drive out the asexual competitor.

PMID:
10749210
DOI:
10.1038/35005078
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Nature Publishing Group
Loading ...
Support Center