Literature DB >> 22777020

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

Patricia L R Brennan1, Richard O Prum.   

Abstract

Sexual conflict occurs when the evolutionary interests of the sexes differ and it broadly applies to decisions over mating, fertilization and parental investment. Recently, a narrower view of sexual conflict has emerged in which direct selection on females to avoid male-imposed costs during mating is considered the distinguishing feature of conflict, while indirect selection is considered negligible. In this view, intersexual selection via sensory bias is seen as the most relevant mechanism by which male traits that harm females evolve, with antagonistic coevolution between female preferences and male manipulation following. Under this narrower framework, female preference and resistance have been synonymized because both result in a mating bias, and similarly male display and coercion are not distinguished. Our recent work on genital evolution in waterfowl has highlighted problems with this approach. In waterfowl, preference and resistance are distinct components of female phenotype, and display and coercion are independent male strategies. Female preference for male displays result in mate choice, while forced copulations by unpreferred males result in resistance to prevent these males from achieving matings and fertilizations. Genital elaborations in female waterfowl appear to function in reinforcing female preference to maintain the indirect benefits of choice rather than to reduce the direct costs of coercive mating. We propose a return to a broader view of conflict where indirect selection and intrasexual selection are considered important in the evolution of conflict.

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22777020      PMCID: PMC3391425          DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2011.0284

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


  43 in total

1.  The evolution of female mate choice by sexual conflict.

Authors:  S Gavrilets; G Arnqvist; U Friberg
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2001-03-07       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  Rapid evolution of reproductive barriers driven by sexual conflict.

Authors:  S Gavrilets
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2000-02-24       Impact factor: 49.962

3.  Economic models of animal communication.

Authors: 
Journal:  Anim Behav       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 2.844

4.  Criteria for demonstrating postcopulatory female choice.

Authors:  W G Eberhard
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 3.694

5.  The evolution of polyandry: multiple mating and female fitness in insects.

Authors: 
Journal:  Anim Behav       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 2.844

6.  Forced copulation results in few extrapair fertilizations in Ross's and lesser snow geese.

Authors: 
Journal:  Anim Behav       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 2.844

7.  Sympatric speciation by sexual conflict.

Authors:  Sergey Gavrilets; David Waxman
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2002-07-29       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Mate selection-a selection for a handicap.

Authors:  A Zahavi
Journal:  J Theor Biol       Date:  1975-09       Impact factor: 2.691

9.  Sexual conflict and the evolution of female mate choice and male social dominance.

Authors:  A J Moore; P A Gowaty; W G Wallin; P J Moore
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2001-03-07       Impact factor: 5.349

10.  The function of female resistance behavior: intromission by male coercion vs. female cooperation in sepsis flies (Diptera: Sepsidae).

Authors:  William G Eberhard
Journal:  Rev Biol Trop       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 0.723

View more
  16 in total

1.  Sexual and social competition: broadening perspectives by defining female roles.

Authors:  Dustin R Rubenstein
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2012-08-19       Impact factor: 6.237

2.  Sexual conflict over mating in red-sided garter snakes (Thamnophis sirtalis) as indicated by experimental manipulation of genitalia.

Authors:  Christopher R Friesen; Emily J Uhrig; Mattie K Squire; Robert T Mason; Patricia L R Brennan
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2013-11-13       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  Inter-genomic sexual conflict drives antagonistic coevolution in harvester ants.

Authors:  Michael Herrmann; Sara Helms Cahan
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2014-12-22       Impact factor: 5.349

Review 4.  Mechanisms and Evidence of Genital Coevolution: The Roles of Natural Selection, Mate Choice, and Sexual Conflict.

Authors:  Patricia L R Brennan; Richard O Prum
Journal:  Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol       Date:  2015-07-01       Impact factor: 10.005

Review 5.  Polyandry: the history of a revolution.

Authors:  Geoff A Parker; Tim R Birkhead
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2013-01-21       Impact factor: 6.237

6.  Female mating preferences determine system-level evolution in a gene network model.

Authors:  Janna L Fierst
Journal:  Genetica       Date:  2013-04-13       Impact factor: 1.082

7.  Genital interactions during simulated copulation among marine mammals.

Authors:  Dara N Orbach; Diane A Kelly; Mauricio Solano; Patricia L R Brennan
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2017-10-11       Impact factor: 5.349

8.  Female resistance to sexual coercion can evolve to preserve the indirect benefits of mate choice.

Authors:  Samuel S Snow; Suzanne H Alonzo; Maria R Servedio; Richard O Prum
Journal:  J Evol Biol       Date:  2019-04-02       Impact factor: 2.411

9.  An innovative ovipositor for niche exploitation impacts genital coevolution between sexes in a fruit-damaging Drosophila.

Authors:  Leona Muto; Yoshitaka Kamimura; Kentaro M Tanaka; Aya Takahashi
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2018-09-26       Impact factor: 5.349

10.  Comparative analyses of reproductive structures in harvestmen (opiliones) reveal multiple transitions from courtship to precopulatory antagonism.

Authors:  Mercedes M Burns; Marshal Hedin; Jeffrey W Shultz
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-06-10       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.