Sex differences in adult mortality rate mediated by early-life environmental conditions.

Variation in sex differences is affected by both genetic and environmental variation, with rapid change in sex differences being more likely due to environmental change. One case of rapid change in sex differences is human lifespan, which has become increasingly female-biased in recent centuries. Long-term consequences of variation in the early-life environment may, in part, explain such variation in sex differences, but whether the early-life environment mediates sex differences in life-history traits is poorly understood in animals. Combining longitudinal data on 60 cohorts of pre-industrial Finns with environmental data, we show that the early-life environment is associated with sex differences in adult mortality and expected lifespan. Specifically, low infant survival rates and high rye yields (an important food source) in early-life are associated with female-bias in adult lifespan. These results support the hypothesis that environmental change has the potential to affect sex differences in life-history traits in natural populations of long-lived mammals.

What have humans done for evolutionary biology? Contributions from genes to populations.

Many fundamental concepts in evolutionary biology were discovered using non-human study systems. Humans are poorly suited to key study designs used to advance this field, and are subject to cultural, technological, and medical influences often considered to restrict the pertinence of human studies to other species and general contexts. Whether studies using current and recent human populations provide insights that have broader biological relevance in evolutionary biology is, therefore, frequently questioned. We first surveyed researchers in evolutionary biology and related fields on their opinions regarding whether studies on contemporary humans can advance evolutionary biology. Almost all 442 participants agreed that humans still evolve, but fewer agreed that this occurs through natural selection. Most agreed that human studies made valuable contributions to evolutionary biology, although those less exposed to human studies expressed more negative views. With a series of examples, we discuss strengths and limitations of evolutionary studies on contemporary humans. These show that human studies provide fundamental insights into evolutionary processes, improve understanding of the biology of many other species, and will make valuable contributions to evolutionary biology in the future.

The shared genome is a pervasive constraint on the evolution of sex-biased gene expression.

Males and females share most of their genomes, and differences between the sexes can therefore not evolve through sequence divergence in protein coding genes. Sexual dimorphism is instead restricted to occur through sex-specific expression and splicing of gene products. Evolution of sexual dimorphism through these mechanisms should, however, also be constrained when the sexes share the genetic architecture for regulation of gene expression. Despite these obstacles, sexual dimorphism is prevalent in the animal kingdom and commonly evolves rapidly. Here, we ask whether the genetic architecture of gene expression is plastic and easily molded by sex-specific selection, or if sexual dimorphism evolves rapidly despite pervasive genetic constraint. To address this question, we explore the relationship between the intersexual genetic correlation for gene expression (rMF), which captures how independently genes are regulated in the sexes, and the evolution of sex-biased gene expression. Using transcriptome data from Drosophila melanogaster, we find that most genes have a high rMF and that genes currently exposed to sexually antagonistic selection have a higher average rMF than other genes. We further show that genes with a high rMF have less pronounced sex-biased gene expression than genes with a low rMF within D. melanogaster and that the strength of the rMF in D. melanogaster predicts the degree to which the sex bias of a gene's expression has changed between D. melanogaster and six other species in the Drosophila genus. In sum, our results show that a shared genome constrains both short- and long-term evolution of sexual dimorphism.

Autosomal and X-Linked Additive Genetic Variation for Lifespan and Aging: Comparisons Within and Between the Sexes in Drosophila melanogaster.

Theory makes several predictions concerning differences in genetic variation between the X chromosome and the autosomes due to male X hemizygosity. The X chromosome should: (i) typically show relatively less standing genetic variation than the autosomes, (ii) exhibit more variation in males compared to females because of dosage compensation, and (iii) potentially be enriched with sex-specific genetic variation. Here, we address each of these predictions for lifespan and aging in Drosophila melanogaster To achieve unbiased estimates of X and autosomal additive genetic variance, we use 80 chromosome substitution lines; 40 for the X chromosome and 40 combining the two major autosomes, which we assay for sex-specific and cross-sex genetic (co)variation. We find significant X and autosomal additive genetic variance for both traits in both sexes (with reservation for X-linked variation of aging in females), but no conclusive evidence for depletion of X-linked variation (measured through females). Males display more X-linked variation for lifespan than females, but it is unclear if this is due to dosage compensation since also autosomal variation is larger in males. Finally, our results suggest that the X chromosome is enriched for sex-specific genetic variation in lifespan but results were less conclusive for aging overall. Collectively, these results suggest that the X chromosome has reduced capacity to respond to sexually concordant selection on lifespan from standing genetic variation, while its ability to respond to sexually antagonistic selection may be augmented.