Gen 20 male mating success

This data file was created in Excel. It is the mating success of males assayed in generation 20, where females from the MA lines choose between a stock male and a male from a MA line. MA lines were divided into two treatments: Controls (C), without sexual selection and Selection (S) with sexual selection. Trials were conducted over 2 days. . Males were either successful in gaining a mating (choice=1) or unsuccessful (choice=0)

Female harm viability data

This data is associated with the supplementary results, and file was created in Excel. It is the count of individual adults (M=males; F=females) emerging from single pair matings. Females from Control MA lines (not subjected to sexual selection) were paired with random males from either Control or Selection MA lines. Approximately 20 females per MA line were mated with males from the Selection treatment and 20 with males from the Control treatment. Male treatment (C=Control; S=Selection) is recorded. Approximately 10 males per MA line were assayed (MaleMALine, with numbers nested within Treatment). The mating pairs were set-up over 3 days

Viability data

This data is the count of the number of individual adults (M=Male; F=Female) emerging from single brother-sister mating pairs. These pairs came from different selection treatments (C=Control; S=Selection), with individual MA lines nested within treatment. File was created in Excel

Male Mating Success

This data file was created in Excel. It is the mating success of males in assays in generations 1, 3, 7, 11 and 23 of a mutation accumulation experiment in which one set of 100 lines were subjected to sexual selection on male mating success (Treatment = S) and the other set of 100 lines were not (Treatment = C; Controls). Except in generation 1, C and S males were competed against one another, and half of the assayed males per line had their wings clipped for identification (Clip = 1; males without clip, Clip=0). Trials were conducted over 2 days each generation. The choosing female in these trials came from the stock population. Males were either successful in gaining a mating (choice=1) or unsuccessful (choice=0)

Phenotype data to estimate genetic variance

Ten phenotypic traits with ecotype, population (block), sire and dam identifiers

Adaptation of Male and Female CHCs to the Different Treatment Environments

<p>Variation among populations is presented as the first CV of the sex × treatment interaction from a MANOVA of the eight logcontrast CHCs of individuals from the 12 populations. Males are represented by filled symbols, and females by open symbols. The four replicate populations within each treatment are indicated by the different shaped symbols (there is no correspondence among treatment environments of populations represented by the same symbol).</p

Thin-Plate Spline Representations of Bivariate Fitness Surfaces for Male CHCs for Which Female Mating Preferences Evolved in Correlation with Treatment Environment

<p>(A) Visualization of the fitness surface of the two male CHCs for which linear sexual selection varied most among treatments.</p> <p>(B) Visualization of the fitness surface of the two male CHCs for which nonlinear sexual selection varied most among treatments.</p> <p>The four replicate populations within each treatment were pooled in each case. To aid in comparisons across treatments, a single smoothing parameter (λ) was chosen that gave the lowest generalized cross-validation score in all three treatments [<a href="http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pbio.0030368#pbio-0030368-b43" target="_blank">43</a>] separately for (A) (λ = −1.0) and (B) (λ = −0.2).</p

15 RIL CHC and gene factor means

RIL line means for 12 genetic factors and 9 cuticular hydrocarbons for the line-mean analysis presented in Table 2