Traditionally it was thought that fitness-related traits such as male mating frequency, with a history of strong directional selection, should have little additive genetic variance and thus respond asymmetrically to bidirectional artificial selection. However, recent findings and theory suggest that a balance between selection for increased male mating frequency and opposing selection pressures on physiologically linked traits will cause male mating frequency to have high additive genetic variation and hence respond symmetrically to selection. We tested these hypotheses in the stalk-eyed fly, Cyrtodiopsis dalmanni, in which males hold harems comprising many females and so have the opportunity to mate at extremely high frequencies. We subjected male stalk-eyed flies to artificial selection for increased ('high') and decreased ('low') mating frequency in the presence of ecologically realistic, high numbers of females. High line males mated significantly more often than control or low line males. The direct response to selection was approximately symmetric in the high and low lines, revealing high additive genetic variation for, and no significant genetic constraints on, increased male mating frequency in C. dalmanni. In order to investigate trade-offs that might constrain male mating frequency under natural conditions we examined correlated responses to artificial selection. We measured accessory gland length, testis length and eyespan after 7 and 14 generations of selection. High line males had significantly larger accessory glands than low line males. No consistent correlated responses to selection were found in testis length or eyespan. Our results suggest that costs associated with the production and maintenance of large accessory glands, although yet to be identified, are likely to be a major constraint on mating frequency in natural populations of C. dalmanni.
In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field.