Literature DB >> 28568205

THE DARWIN-FISHER THEORY OF SEXUAL SELECTION IN MONOGAMOUS BIRDS.

Mark Kirkpatrick1, Trevor Price2, Stevan J Arnold3.   

Abstract

Males of monogamous birds often show secondary sexual traits that are conspicuous but considerably less extreme than those of polygynous species. We develop a quantitative-genetic model for the joint evolution of a male secondary sexual trait, a female mating preference, and female breeding date, following a theory proposed by Darwin and Fisher. Good nutritional condition is postulated to cause females to breed early and to have high fecundity. The most-preferred males are mated by early-breeding females and receive a sexual-selection advantage from those females' greater reproductive success. Results show that conspicuous male traits that decrease survival can evolve but suggest that the extent of maladaptive evolution is greatly limited relative to what is possible in a polygynous mating system for two reasons. First, in the absence of direct fitness effects of mate choice on the female, the equilibria for the male trait and female preference form a curve whose shape shows that the maximum possible strength of sexual selection on males (and hence the potential for maladaptive evolution) is constrained. Under certain conditions, a segment of the equilibrium curve may become unstable, leading to two alternative stable states for the male trait. Second, male parental care will often favor the evolution of mating preferences for less conspicuous males. We also find that sexual selection can appear in the absence of the nutritional effects emphasized by Darwin and Fisher. A review of the literature suggests that the assumptions of the Darwin-Fisher mechanism may often be met in monogamous birds and that other mechanisms may often reinforce it by producing additional components of sexual selection. © 1990 The Society for the Study of Evolution.

Year:  1990        PMID: 28568205     DOI: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.1990.tb04288.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Evolution        ISSN: 0014-3820            Impact factor:   3.694


  9 in total

Review 1.  The evolution of female ornaments and weaponry: social selection, sexual selection and ecological competition.

Authors:  Joseph A Tobias; Robert Montgomerie; Bruce E Lyon
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2012-08-19       Impact factor: 6.237

2.  Grey zones of sexual selection: why is finding a modern definition so hard?

Authors:  Suzanne H Alonzo; Maria R Servedio
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2019-08-21       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  Extrapair mating and the strength of sexual selection: insights from a polymorphic species.

Authors:  Andrea S Grunst; Melissa L Grunst; Marisa L Korody; Lindsay M Forrette; Rusty A Gonser; Elaine M Tuttle
Journal:  Behav Ecol       Date:  2019-02-09       Impact factor: 2.671

4.  Polygyny and extra-pair paternity enhance the opportunity for sexual selection in blue tits.

Authors:  Oscar Vedder; Jan Komdeur; Marco van der Velde; Elske Schut; Michael J L Magrath
Journal:  Behav Ecol Sociobiol       Date:  2010-10-30       Impact factor: 2.980

5.  Evolution of risk preference is determined by reproduction dynamics, life history, and population size.

Authors:  Oren Kolodny; Caitlin Stern
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-08-24       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  Cultural sexual selection in monogamous human populations.

Authors:  Wataru Nakahashi
Journal:  R Soc Open Sci       Date:  2017-06-21       Impact factor: 2.963

7.  Evolution of a mating preference for a dual-utility trait used in intrasexual competition in genetically monogamous populations.

Authors:  Caitlin A Stern; Maria R Servedio
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2017-09-02       Impact factor: 2.912

8.  A perspective on sensory drive.

Authors:  Rebecca C Fuller; John A Endler
Journal:  Curr Zool       Date:  2018-07-06       Impact factor: 2.624

9.  The contribution of extra-pair paternity to the variation in lifetime and age-specific male reproductive success in a socially monogamous species.

Authors:  Sara Raj Pant; Maaike A Versteegh; Martijn Hammers; Terry Burke; Hannah L Dugdale; David S Richardson; Jan Komdeur
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2022-04-09       Impact factor: 4.171

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.