Sexual antagonism drives the displacement of polymorphism across gene regulatory cascades

Secondary reversion to sexual monomorphism associated with tissue-specific loss of doublesex expression

Animal evolution is characterized by frequent turnover of sexually dimorphic traits-new sex-specific characters are gained, and some ancestral sex-specific characters are lost, in many lineages. In insects, sexual differentiation is predominantly cell autonomous and depends on the expression of the doublesex (dsx) transcription factor. In most cases, cells that transcribe dsx have the potential to undergo sex-specific differentiation, while those that lack dsx expression do not. Consistent with this mode of development, comparative research has shown that the origin of new sex-specific traits can be associated with the origin of new spatial domains of dsx expression. In this report, we examine the opposite situation-a secondary loss of the sex comb, a male-specific grasping structure that develops on the front legs of some drosophilid species. We show that while the origin of the sex comb is linked to an evolutionary gain of dsx expression in the leg, sex comb loss in a newly identified species of Lordiphosa (Drosophilidae) is associated with a secondary loss of dsx expression. We discuss how the developmental control of sexual dimorphism affects the mechanisms by which sex-specific traits can evolve.

Genome-wide interaction analysis identified low-frequency variants with sex disparity in lung cancer risk

Differences by sex in lung cancer incidence and mortality have been reported which cannot be fully explained by sex differences in smoking behavior, implying existence of genetic and molecular basis for sex disparity in lung cancer development. However, the information about sex dimorphism in lung cancer risk is quite limited despite the great success in lung cancer association studies. By adopting a stringent two-stage analysis strategy, we performed a genome-wide gene-sex interaction analysis using genotypes from a lung cancer cohort including ~ 47 000 individuals with European ancestry. Three low-frequency variants (minor allele frequency < 0.05), rs17662871 [odds ratio (OR) = 0.71, P = 4.29×10-8); rs79942605 (OR = 2.17, P = 2.81×10-8) and rs208908 (OR = 0.70, P = 4.54×10-8) were identified with different risk effect of lung cancer between men and women. Further expression quantitative trait loci and functional annotation analysis suggested rs208908 affects lung cancer risk through differential regulation of Coxsackie virus and adenovirus receptor gene expression in lung tissues between men and women. Our study is one of the first studies to provide novel insights about the genetic and molecular basis for sex disparity in lung cancer development.

Is the X chromosome a hot spot for sexually antagonistic polymorphisms? Biases in current empirical tests of classical theory

Females and males carry nearly identical genomes, which can constrain the evolution of sexual dimorphism and generate conditions that are favourable for maintaining sexually antagonistic (SA) polymorphisms, in which alleles beneficial for one sex are deleterious for the other. An influential theoretical prediction, by Rice (Rice 1984 Evolution38, 735-742), is that the X chromosome should be a 'hot spot' (i.e. enriched) for SA polymorphisms. While important caveats to Rice's theoretical prediction have since been highlighted (e.g. by Fry (2010) Evolution64, 1510-1516), several empirical studies appear to support it. Here, we show that current tests of Rice's theory-most of which are based on quantitative genetic measures of fitness (co)variance-are frequently biased towards detecting X-linked effects. We show that X-linked genes tend to contribute disproportionately to quantitative genetic patterns of SA fitness variation whether or not the X is enriched for SA polymorphisms. Population genomic approaches for detecting SA loci, including genome-wide association study of fitness and analyses of intersexual FST, are similarly biased towards detecting X-linked effects. In the light of our models, we critically re-evaluate empirical evidence for Rice's theory and discuss prospects for empirically testing it.