Contrasting mutual sexual selection on homologous signal traits in Drosophila serrata

American Naturalist

Volumn 165, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 281-289

  Chenoweth, Stephen F ^a   Blows, Mark W ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

Author keywords

Male choice; Mutual mate choice; Selection gradients; Sexual selection

Indexed keywords

HYDROCARBON;

MALE BEHAVIOR; MATE CHOICE; SEXUAL SELECTION; SIGNALING;

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; DROSOPHILA; FEMALE; MALE; METABOLISM; PHENOTYPE; PHYSIOLOGY; SEX DIFFERENCE; SEXUAL BEHAVIOR;

ANIMALS; DROSOPHILA; FEMALE; HYDROCARBONS; MALE; PHENOTYPE; SEX FACTORS; SEXUAL BEHAVIOR, ANIMAL;

DIPTERA; DROSOPHILA SERRATA; DROSOPHILIDAE;

EID: 13944271079     PISSN: 00030147     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1086/427271     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Amundsen, T. 2000. Why are female birds ornamented? Trends in Ecology & Evolution 15:149-145.
2. Andersson, M. 1994. Sexual selection. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
3. Atchison, J. 1986. The statistical analysis of compositional data. Chapman & Hall, London.
4. Bisgaard, S., and B. Ankenman. 1996. Standard errors for the eigen-values in second-order response surface models. Technometrics 38:238-246.
5. Blows, M. W., and R. A. Allan. 1998. Levels of mate recognition within and between two Drosophila species and their hybrids. American Naturalist 152:826-837.
6. Blows, M. W., and R. Brooks. 2003. Measuring nonlinear selection. American Naturalist 162:815-820.
7. Blows, M. W., S. F. Chenoweth, and E. Hine. 2004. Orientation of the genetic variance-covariance matrix and the fitness surface for multiple male sexually selected traits. American Naturalist 163:329-340.
8. Bonduriansky, R. 2001. The evolution of male mate choice in insects: a synthesis of ideas and evidence. Biological Reviews 76:305-339.
9. Bowerman, B. L., and R. T. O'Connell. 1990. Linear statistical models: an applied approach. Duxbury, Belmont, CA.
10. Brodie, E. D., III, A. J. Moore, and F. J. Janzen. 1995. Visualizing and quantifying natural selection. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 10:313-318.
11. Burley, N. 1977. Parental investment, mate choice and mate quality. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 74:3476-3479.
12. Chenoweth, S. F., and M. W. Blows. 2003. Signal trait sexual dimorphism and mutual sexual selection in Drosophila serrata. Evolution 57:2326-2334.
13. Draper, N. R., and J. A. John. 1988. Response-surface designs for quantitative and qualitative variables. Technometrics 30:423-428.
14. Fitzpatrick, S., A. Berglund, and G. Rosenqvist. 1995. Ornaments or offspring: costs to reproductive success restrict sexual selection processes. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 55:251-260.
15. Green, P. J., and B. W. Silverman. 1994. Nonparametric regression and generalised linear models. Chapman & Hall, London.
16. Higgie, M., S. Chenoweth, and M. W. Blows. 2000. Natural selection and the reinforcement of mate recognition. Science 290:519-521.
17. Hill, G. E. 1993. Male mate choice and the evolution of female plumage coloration in the house finch. Evolution 47:1515-1525.
18. Hine, E., S. Lachish, M. Higgie, and M. W. Blows. 2002. Positive genetic correlation between female preference and offspring fitness. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 269:2215-2219.
19. Hunt, S., I. C. Cuthill, A. T. D. Bennett, and R. Griffiths. 1999. Preferences for ultraviolet partners in the blue tit. Animal Behaviour 58:809-815.
20. Johnstone, R. A., J. D. Reynolds, and J. C. Deutsch. 1996. Mutual mate choice and sex differences in choosiness. Evolution 50:1382-1391.
21. Jones, I. L., and M. F. Hunter. 1993. Mutual sexual selection in a monogamous seabird. Nature 362:238-239.
22. Kingsolver, J. G., H. E. Hoekstra, J. M. Hoekstra, D. Berrigan, S. N. Vignieri, C. E. Hill, A. Hoang, P. Gilbert, and P. Beerli. 2001. The strength of phenotypic selection in natural populations. American Naturalist 157:245-261.
23. Kokko, H. 1998. Should advertising parental care be honest? Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 265:1871-1878.
24. Kokko, H., and R. A. Johnstone. 2002. Why is mutual mate choice not the norm? operational sex ratios, sex roles and the evolution of sexually dimorphic and monomorphic signaling. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B 357:319-330.
25. Kokko, H., and P. Monaghan. 2001. Predicting the direction of sexual selection. Ecology Letters 4:159-165.
26. Kraushaar, U., and W. U. Blanckenhorn. 2002. Population variation in sexual selection and its effect on size allometry in two dung fly species with contrasting sexual size dimorphism. Evolution 56:307-321.
27. Lande, R. 1979. Quantitative genetic analysis of multivariate evolution, applied to brain : body size allometry. Evolution 33:402-416.
28. _. 1980. Sexual dimorphism, sexual selection and adaptation in polygenic characters. Evolution 34:292-305.
29. Lande, R., and S. J. Arnold. 1983. The measurement of selection on correlated characters. Evolution 37:1210-1226.
30. Mitchell-Olds, T., and R. G. Shaw 1987. Regression analysis of natural selection: statistical inference and biological interpretation. Evolution 41:1149-1161.
31. Monaghan, P., N. Metcalfe, and D. C. Houston. 1996. Male finches selectively pair with fecund females. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 263:1183-1186.
32. Owens, I. P. F., and D. B. A. Thompson. 1994. Sex-differences, sex-ratios and sex-roles. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 258:93-99.
33. Parker, J. 1983. Mate quality and mating decisions. Pages 141-166 in P. Bateson, ed. Mate choice. Cambridge University Press, New York.
34. Phillips, P. C., and S. J. Arnold. 1989. Visualizing multivariate selection. Evolution 43:1209-1222.
35. Ritchie, M. G. 1996. The shape of female mating preferences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 93:14628-14631.
36. Ryan, M. J., and W. Wilcyzynski. 1988. Coevolution of sender and receiver: effect on local mate preference in cricket frogs. Science 240:1786-1788.
37. Sandvik, M., G. Rosenqvist, and A. Berglund. 2000. Male and female mate choice affects offspring quality in a sex-role-reversed pipefish. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 267:2151-2155.
38. Schal, C., X. P. Gu, E. L. Burns, and G. J. Blomquist. 1994. Patterns of biosynthesis and accumulation of hydrocarbons and contact sex-pheromone in the female German cockroach, Blattella germanica. Archives of Insect Biochemistry and Physiology 25:375-391.
39. Schluter, D. 1988. Estimating the form of natural selection on a quantitative trait. Evolution 42:849-861.
40. Velando, A., C. M. Lessells, and J. C. Márquez. 2001. The function of female and male ornaments in the Inca tern: evidence for links between ornament expression and both adult condition and reproductive performance. Journal of Avian Biology 32:311-318.
41. Wagner, W. E. 1998. Measuring female mating preferences. Animal Behaviour 55:1029-1042.
42. Wicker, C., and J. M. Jallon. 1995. Influence of ovary and ecdysteroids on pheromone biosynthesis in Drosophila melanogaster (Diptera, Drosophilidae). European Journal of Entomology 92:197-202.