Literature DB >> 16612895

Sensory exploitation and sexual conflict.

Göran Arnqvist1.   

Abstract

Much of the literature on male-female coevolution concerns the processes by which male traits and female preferences for these can coevolve and be maintained by selection. There has been less explicit focus on the origin of male traits and female preferences. Here, I argue that it is important to distinguish origin from subsequent coevolution and that insights into the origin can help us appreciate the relative roles of various coevolutionary processes for the evolution of diversity in sexual dimorphism. I delineate four distinct scenarios for the origin of male traits and female preferences that build on past contributions, two of which are based on pre-existing variation in quality indicators among males and two on exploitation of pre-existing sensory biases among females. Recent empirical research, and theoretical models, suggest that origin by sensory exploitation has been widespread. I argue that this points to a key, but perhaps transient, role for sexually antagonistic coevolution (SAC) in the subsequent evolutionary elaboration of sexual traits, because (i) sensory exploitation is often likely to be initially costly for individuals of the exploited sex and (ii) the subsequent evolution of resistance to sensory exploitation should often be associated with costs due to selective constraints. A review of a few case studies is used to illustrate these points. Empirical data directly relevant to the costs of being sensory exploited and the costs of evolving resistance is largely lacking, and I stress that such data would help determining the general importance of sexual conflict and SAC for the evolution of sexual dimorphism.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16612895      PMCID: PMC1569614          DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2005.1790

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci        ISSN: 0962-8436            Impact factor:   6.237


  51 in total

1.  Bumpus in the snake den: effects of sex, size, and body condition on mortality of red-sided garter snakes.

Authors:  R Shine; M P LeMaster; I T Moore; M M Olsson; R T Mason
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 3.694

2.  Antagonistic coevolution between the sexes in a group of insects.

Authors:  Göran Arnqvist; Locke Rowe
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2002-02-14       Impact factor: 49.962

3.  Sexual selection and speciation.

Authors:  T M. Panhuis; R Butlin; M Zuk; T Tregenza
Journal:  Trends Ecol Evol       Date:  2001-07-01       Impact factor: 17.712

4.  Sexually antagonistic coevolution in a mating system: combining experimental and comparative approaches to address evolutionary processes.

Authors:  Locke Rowe; Göran Arnqvist
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 3.694

5.  Does multiple paternity improve fitness of the frog Crinia georgiana?

Authors:  P G Byrne; J D Roberts
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 3.694

Review 6.  Phylogeny and biology of neotropical orchid bees (Euglossini).

Authors:  Sydney A Cameron
Journal:  Annu Rev Entomol       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 19.686

7.  A generalized female bias for long tails in a short-tailed widowbird.

Authors:  Sarah R Pryke; Staffan Andersson
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2002-10-22       Impact factor: 5.349

Review 8.  Spectacular phenomena and limits to rationality in genetic and cultural evolution.

Authors:  Magnus Enquist; Anthony Arak; Stefano Ghirlanda; Carl-Adam Wachtmeister
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2002-11-29       Impact factor: 6.237

9.  The shape of female mating preferences.

Authors:  M G Ritchie
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1996-12-10       Impact factor: 11.205

10.  Honesty, perception and population divergence in sexually selected traits.

Authors:  D Schluter; T Price
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  1993-07-22       Impact factor: 5.349

View more
  35 in total

1.  Foraging costs drive female resistance to a sensory trap.

Authors:  Constantino Macías Garcia; Yolitzi Saldívar Lemus
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2012-02-01       Impact factor: 5.349

Review 2.  The limits of sexual conflict in the narrow sense: new insights from waterfowl biology.

Authors:  Patricia L R Brennan; Richard O Prum
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2012-08-19       Impact factor: 6.237

3.  Sensory modalities in cichlid fish behavior.

Authors:  Daniel Escobar-Camacho; Karen L Carleton
Journal:  Curr Opin Behav Sci       Date:  2015-12-01

Review 4.  Introduction. Sexual conflict: a new paradigm?

Authors:  T Tregenza; N Wedell; T Chapman
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2006-02-28       Impact factor: 6.237

Review 5.  Evolution of genitalia: theories, evidence, and new directions.

Authors:  William G Eberhard
Journal:  Genetica       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 1.082

6.  How blood-derived odor influences mate-choice decisions by a mosquito-eating predator.

Authors:  Fiona R Cross; Robert R Jackson; Simon D Pollard
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2009-11-03       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  Intensity invariance properties of auditory neurons compared to the statistics of relevant natural signals in grasshoppers.

Authors:  Jan Clemens; Gerroth Weschke; Astrid Vogel; Bernhard Ronacher
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2010-03-07       Impact factor: 1.836

8.  Ejaculate components delay reproductive senescence while elevating female reproductive rate in an insect.

Authors:  Klaus Reinhardt; Richard A Naylor; Michael T Siva-Jothy
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2009-12-08       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 9.  The evolution of sexually antagonistic phenotypes.

Authors:  Jennifer C Perry; Locke Rowe
Journal:  Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol       Date:  2015-06-01       Impact factor: 10.005

10.  Asymmetrical integration of sensory information during mating decisions in grasshoppers.

Authors:  Jan Clemens; Stefanie Krämer; Bernhard Ronacher
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2014-11-03       Impact factor: 11.205

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.