The epistatic handicap principle does work

Journal of Theoretical Biology

Volumn 191, Issue 2, 1998, Pages 141-161

  Siller, Steven ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

HANDICAP PRINCIPLE; MODELLING; SEXUAL SELECTION;

ARTICLE; GENETIC MODEL; GENETIC SELECTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE GENETICS; QUANTITATIVE TRAIT; SEX;

MARTES PENNANTI;

EID: 0032554485     PISSN: 00225193     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1006/jtbi.1997.0573     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. ANDERSSON, M. (1982). Sexual selection, natural selection and quality advertisement. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 17, 375-393.
2. ANDERSSON, M. (1994). Sexual Selection. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
3. BARTON, N. H. & TURELLI, M. (1991). Natural and sexual selection on many loci. Genetics 127, 229-255.
4. BELL, G. (1978). The handicap principle in sexual selection. Evolution 32, 872-885.
5. Bell, G. (1982). The Master Piece of Nature: The Evolution and Genetics of Sexuality. Berkeley: University of California Press.
6. BULMER, M. (1980). The Mathematical Theory of Quantitative Genetics. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
7. CHARLESWORTH, B. (1987). The heritability of fitness. In: Sexual Selection: Testing the Alternatives (Bradbury, J. W. & Andersson, M. B., eds), pp. 21-40. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
8. COLLINS, S. (1993). Is there only one type of male handicap? Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B 252, 193-197.
9. DAVIS, J. W. F. & O'DONALD, P. (1976). Sexual selection for a handicap: A critical analysis of Zahavi's model. J. theor. Biol. 115, 345-354.
10. ESHEL, I. (1978). On the handicap principle - A critical defence. J. theor. Biol. 70, 245-250.
11. ESHEL, I. (1996). On the changing concept of evolutionary population stability as a reflection of a changing point of view in the quantitative theory of evolution. J. Math. Biol. 34, 485-510.
12. FALCONER, D. S. (1989). Introduction to Quantitative Genetics. New York: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
13. FISHER, R. A. (1930). The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
14. GHISELIN, M. T. (1974). The Economy of Nature and the Evolution of Sex. Berkeley: University of California Press.
15. GRAFEN, A. (1990a). Sexual selection unhandicapped by the Fisher process. J. theor. Biol. 144, 473-516.
16. GRAFEN, A. (1990b). Biological signals as handicaps. J. theor. Biol. 144, 517-546.
17. HAMILTON, W. D. & ZUK, M. (1982). Heritable true fitness and bright birds: a role for parasites? Science 218, 384-387.
18. HAMMERSTEIN, P. (1996). Darwinian adaptation, population genetics and the street car theory of evolution. J. Math. Biol. 34, 511-532.
19. IWASA, Y. & POMIANKOWSKI, A. (1994). The evolution of mate preferences for multiple sexual ornaments. Evolution 48, 1431-1442.
20. IWASA, Y., POMIANKOWSKI, A. & NEE, S. (1991). The evolution of costly mate preferences II. The "handicap" principle. Evolution 45, 853-867.
21. JANETOS, A. C. (1980). Strategies of female mate choice: a theoretical analysis. Behav. Ecol. and Sociobiol. 7, 107-112.
22. JOHNSTONE, R. A. (1995). Sexual selection, honest advertisement and the handicap principle: reviewing the evidence. Biol. Rev. 70, 1-65.
23. JOHNSTONE, R. A. & GRAFEN, A. (1992). Error-prone signalling. Proc. Roy. Soc. of Lond. B 248, 229-233.
24. KIRKPATRICK, M. (1982). Sexual selection and the evolution of female choice. Evolution 36, 1-12.
25. KIRKPATRICK, M. & BARTON, N. H. (1997). The strength of indirect selection on female mating preferences. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 94, 1282-1286.
26. KONDRASHOV, A. S. (1988). Deleterious mutations as an evolutionary factor. III. Mating preference and some general remarks. J. theor. Biol. 131, 487-496.
27. LANDE, R. (1980). Sexual dimorphism, sexual selection, and adaptation in polygenic characters. Evolution 34, 292-305.
28. LANDE, R. (1981). Models of speciation by sexual selection on polygenic traits. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 78, 3721-3725.
29. MAILAITH, G. (1987). Incentive compatibility in signaling games with a continuum of types. Econometrica 55, 1349-1365.
30. MAYNARD-SMITH, J. (1976). Sexual selection and the handicap principle. J. theor. Biol. 57, 239-242.
31. MAYNARD-SMITH, J. (1978). The handicap principle - A comment. J. theor. Biol. 70, 251-252.
32. MAYNARD-SMITH, J. (1985). Mini review: sexual selection, handicaps and true fitness. J. theor. Biol. 115, 1-8.
33. MAYNARD-SMITH, J. (1987). Sexual selection - A classification of models. In Sexual Selection: Testing the Alternatives (Bradbury, J. W. & Andersson, M. B., eds), pp. 9-20. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
34. MAYNARD-SMITH, J. (1991). Theories of sexual selection. Trends Ecol. Evol. 6, 146-151.
35. MØLLER, A. P. (1994). Sexual Selection and the Barn Swallow. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
36. O'DONALD, P. (1980). Genetic Models of Sexual Selection. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
37. PARKER, G. A. (1982). Phenotype-limited evolutionarily stable strategies. In Current Problems in Sociobiology (King's College Sociobiology Group, eds), pp. 173-201. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
38. PARKER, G. A. (1983). Arms races in evolution - An ESS to the opponent-independent costs game. J. theor. Biol. 101, 619-648.
39. POMIANKOWSKI, A. (1988). The evolution of female mate preferences for male genetic quality. Oxford Surveys in Evolutionary Biology 5, 136-184. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
40. POMIANKOWSKI, A. & IWASA, Y. (1993). Evolution of multiple sexual preferences by Fisher's runaway process of sexual selection. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B. 253, 173-181.
41. POMIANKOWSKI, A., IWASA, Y. & NEE, S. (1991). The evolution of costly mate preferences I. Fisher and biased mutation. Evolution 45, 1422-1430.
42. POMIANKOWSKI, A. & MØLLER, A. P. (1995). A resolution of the lek paradox. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B. 260, 21-29.
43. REAL, L. A. (1990). Search theory and mate choice I. Models of single-sex discrimination. Am. Nat. 136, 376-404.
44. RICE, W. (1988). Heritable variation in fitness as a prerequisite for adaptive female choice: The effect of mutation-selection balance. Evolution 42, 817-820.
45. ROTMAN, J. J. (1988). An Introduction to Algebraic Topology GTM 119. London: Springer-Verlag.
46. SEGER, J. (1985). Unifying genetic models for the evolution of female choice. Evolution 39, 1185-1193.
47. SILLER, S. (1997). Strategically Developed Phenotypes and the Evolution of Signals. Unpublished D. Phil. Thesis. University of Oxford, Oxford.
48. VAN VALEN, L. (1973). A new evolutionary law. Evol. Theory. 1, 1-30.
49. VEGA-REDONDO, F. & HASSON, O. (1993). A game theoretic model of predator - prey signaling. J. theor. Biol. 162, 309-319.
50. VIA, S. & LANDE, R. (1985). Genotype-environment interaction and the evolution of phenotypic plasticity. Evolution 39, 505-522.
51. WILLIAMS, G. C. (1975). Sex and Evolution. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
52. YASUI, Y. (1997). A "good-sperm" model can explain the evolution of costly multiple matings by females. Am. Nat. 149, 573-584.
53. ZAHAVI, A. (1975). Mate selection - A selection for a handicap. J. theor. Biol. 53, 205-214.
54. ZAHAVI, A. (1977). The cost of honesty. J. theor. Biol. 67, 603-605.