Condition-dependent sexual selection can accelerate adaptation

Evolutionary Ecology Research

Volumn 5, Issue 6, 2003, Pages 867-881

  Lorch, Patrick D ^a,b   Proulx, Stephen ^a,c   Rowe, Locke ^a   Day, Troy ^a,d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF OREGON   (United States)

^d QUEEN S UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Fisher process; Good genes; Individual based model; Simulation

Indexed keywords

MARTES PENNANTI;

EID: 2542439175     PISSN: 15220613     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Agrawal, A.F. 2001. Sexual selection and the maintenance of sexual reproduction. Nature, 411: 692-695.
2. Andersson, M. 1994. Sexual Selection. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
3. Bakker, T.C.M., Künzler, R. and Mazzi, D. 1999. Condition-related mate choice in sticklebacks. Nature, 401: 234.
4. Blows, M.W. 2002. Interaction between natural and sexual selection during the evolution of mate recognition. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, Biol. Sci., 269: 1113-1118.
5. Borgia, G. 1979. Sexual selection and the evolution of mating systems. In Sexual Selection and Reproductive Competition in Insects (M. Blum and A. Blum, eds), pp. 19-80. New York: Academic Press.
6. Cordero, C. and Eberhard, W.G. 2003. Female choice of sexually antagonistic male adaptations: a critical review of some current research. J. Evol. Biol., 16: 1-6.
7. Doebeli, M. and Dieckmann, U. 2000. Evolutionary branching and sympatric speciation caused by different types of ecological interactions. Am. Nat., 156(suppl.): S77-S101.
8. Gavrilets, S., Arnqvist, G. and Friberg, U. 2001. The evolution of female mate choice by sexual conflict. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, Biol. Sci., 268: 531-539.
9. Grafen, A. 1990a. Biological signals as handicaps. J. Theor. Biol., 144: 517-546.
10. Grafen, A. 1990b. Sexual selection unhandicapped by the Fisher process. J. Theor. Biol., 144: 473-516.
11. Haldane, J.B.S. 1932. The Causes of Evolution. London: Harper.
12. Higashi, M., Takimoto, G. and Yamamura, N. 1999. Sympatric speciation by sexual selection. Nature, 402: 523-526.
13. Hoekstra, H.E., Berrigan, D., Vignieri, S.N., Hoang, A., Hill, C.E., Beerli, P. and Kingsolver, J.G. 2001. Strength and tempo of directional selection in the wild. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., USA, 98: 9157-9160.
14. Holland, B. 2002. Sexual selection fails to promote adaptation to a new environment. Evolution, 56: 721-730.
15. Holland, B. and Rice, W.R. 1998. Chase-away sexual selection: antagonistic seduction versus resistance. Evolution, 52: 1-7.
16. Holland, B. and Rice, W.R. 1999. Experimental removal of sexual selection reverses intersexual antagonistic coevolution and removes a reproductive load. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 96: 5083-5088.
17. Houle, D. and Kondrashov, A.S. 2001. Coevolution of costly mate choice and condition-dependent display of good genes. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, Biol. Sci., 269: 97-104.
18. Iwasa, Y. and Pomiankowski, A. 1994. The evolution of mate preferences for multiple sexual ornaments. Evolution, 48: 853-867.
19. Jennions, M.D., Møller, A.P. and Petrie, M. 2001. Sexually selected traits and adult survival: a meta-analysis. Quart. Rev. Biol., 76: 3-31.
20. Kawecki, T.J. 1997. Sympatric speciation via habitat specialization driven by deleterious mutations. Evolution 51: 1751-1763.
21. Kingsolver, J.G., Hoekstra, H.E., Hoekstra, J.M., Berrigan, D., Vignieri, S.N., Hill, C.E., Hoang, A., Gibert, P. and Beerli, P. 2001. The strength of phenotypic selection in natural populations. Am. Nat., 157: 245-261.
22. Kirkpatrick, M. 1982. Sexual selection and the evolution of female choice. Evolution, 36: 1-12.
23. Kirkpatrick, M. 1996. Good genes and direct selection in the evolution of mating preferences. Evolution, 50: 2125-2140.
24. Kirkpatrick, M. and Barton, N.H. 1997. The strength of indirect selection on female mating preferences. Nature, 350: 33-38.
25. Kirkpatrick, M. and Ryan, M.J. 1991. The evolution of mating preferences and the paradox of the lek. Nature, 350: 33-38.
26. Kokko, H., Brooks, R., Jennions, M.D. and Morley, J. 2003. The evolution of mate choice and mating biases. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, 270: 653-664.
27. Kondrashov, A. and Yampolsky, L. 1996. Evolution of amphimixis and recombination under fluctuating selection in one and many traits. Genet. Res., 68: 165-173.
28. Lande, R. 1980. Sexual dimorphism, sexual selection, and adaptation in polygenic characters. Evolution, 34: 292-305.
29. Lande, R. 1981. Models of speciation by sexual selection on polygenic traits. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 78: 3721-3725.
30. Maynard Smith, J. 1985. Sexual selection, handicaps and true fitness. J. Theor. Biol., 115: 1-8.
31. McLain, D.K., Moulton, M.P. and Sanderson, J.G. 1999. Sexual selection and extinction: the fate of plumage-dimorphic and plumage-monomorphic birds introduced onto islands. Evol. Ecol. Res., 1: 549-565.
32. Otto, S.P. and Michalakis, Y. 1998. The evolution of recombination in changing environments. Trends Ecol. Evol., 13: 145-151.
33. Price, T.D., Schluter, D. and Heckman, N.E. 1993. Sexual selection when the female directly benefits. Biol. J. Linn. Soc., 48: 187-211.
34. Promislow, D.L., Smith, E.A. and Pearse, L. 1998. Adult fitness consequences of sexual selection in Drosophila melanogaster. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 95: 10687-10692.
35. Proulx, S.R. 1999. Matings systems and the evolution of niche breadth. Am. Nat., 154: 89-98.
36. Proulx, S.R. 2001. Female choice via indicator traits easily evolves in the face of recombination and migration. Evolution, 55: 2401-2411.
37. Proulx, S.R. 2002. Niche shifts and expansion due to sexual selection. Evol. Ecol. Res., 4: 351-369.
38. Rowe, L. and Houle, D. 1996. The lek paradox and the capture of genetic variance by condition dependent traits. Proc. R. Soc. Lond B, Biol. Sci., 263: 1415-1421.
39. Siller, S. 2001. Sexual selection and the maintenance of sex. Nature, 411: 689-692.
40. Tanaka, Y. 1996. Sexual selection enhances population extinction in a changing environment. J. Theor. Biol., 180: 197-206.
41. Taylor, P.D. and Williams, G.C. 1982. The lek paradox is not resolved. Theor. Pop. Biol., 22: 392-409.
42. Turner, G. and Burrows, M. 1995. A model of sympatric speciation by sexual selection. Proc. R. Soc. Lond B, Biol. Sci., 260: 287-292.
43. Whitlock, M.C. 2000. Fixation of new alleles and the extinction of small populations: drift load, beneficial alleles, and sexual selection. Evolution, 54: 1855-1861.