The dynamics of two- and three-way sexual conflicts over mating

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

Volumn 361, Issue 1466, 2006, Pages 345-354

  Gavrilets, Sergey ^a   Hayashi, Takehiko I ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE   (United States)

Author keywords

Mathematical models; Mating rate; Monandry; Random mating; Remating suppression; Sexual conflict

Indexed keywords

ANTAGONISM; COEVOLUTION; MATING BEHAVIOR; SEXUAL CONFLICT;

ANIMAL; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; CONFLICT; EVOLUTION; FEMALE; MALE; PHYSIOLOGY; POPULATION DYNAMICS; REVIEW; SEXUAL BEHAVIOR;

ANIMALS; CONFLICT (PSYCHOLOGY); EVOLUTION; FEMALE; MALE; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; POPULATION DYNAMICS; SEXUAL BEHAVIOR, ANIMAL;

EID: 33646559189     PISSN: 09628436     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2005.1792     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (40)

1. Abrams, P. A., Harada, Y. & Matsuda, H. 1993 On the relationship between quantitative genetic and ESS models. Evolution 47, 982-985.
2. Arnqvist, G. & Nilsson, T. 2000 The evolution of polyandry: multiple mating and female fitness in insects. Anim. Behav. 60, 145-164. (doi:10.1006/anbe.2000.1446)
3. Arnqvist, G. & Rowe, L. 2005 Sexual conflict. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
4. Ball, M. A. & Parker, G. A. 2003 Sperm competition games: sperm selection by females. J. Theor. Biol. 224, 27-42. (doi:10.1016/S0022-5193(03) 00118-8)
5. Chapman, T., Arnqvist, G., Bangham, J. & Rowe, L. 2003 Sexual conflict. Trends Ecol. Evol. 18, 41-47. (doi:10.1016/S0169-5347(02)00004-6)
6. Clark, A. G., Dermitzakis, E. T. & Civetta, A. 2000 Nontransitivity of sperm precedence in Drosophila. Evolution 54, 1030-1035.
7. Frank, S. A. 2000 Sperm competition and female avoidance of polyspermy mediated by sperm-egg biochemistry. Evol. Ecol. Res. 2, 613-625.
8. Gavrilets, S. 1997 Revolutionary chase in exploiter-victim systems with polygenic characters. J. Theor. Biol. 186, 527-534. (doi:10.1006/jtbi.1997.0426)
9. Gavrilets, S. 2000 Rapid evolution of reproductive isolation driven by sexual conflict. Nature 403, 886-889. (doi:10.1038/35002564)
10. Gavrilets, S. 2004 Fitness landscapes and the origin of species. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
11. Gavrilets, S. & Hayashi, T. I. 2005 Speciation and sexual conflict. Evol. Ecol. 19, 167-198.
12. Gavrilets, S. & Waxman, D. 2002 Sympatric speciation by sexual conflict. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 99, 10 533-10 538. (doi:10.1073/pnas. 152011499)
13. Gavrilets, S., Arnqvist, G. & Friberg, U. 2001 The evolution of female mate choice by sexual conflict. Proc. R. Soc. B 268, 531-539. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2000.1382)
14. Härdling, R. & Smith, H. G. 2005 Introduction: evolutionary processes in sexual conflicts. Evol. Ecol. 19, 109-110.
15. Härdling, R., Jormalainen, V. & Tuomi, J. 1999 Fighting costs stabilize aggressive behavior in intersexual conflicts. Evol. Ecol. 13, 245-265. (doi:10.1023/A:1006667103497)
16. Härdling, R., Smith, H. G., Jormalainen, V. & Tuomi, J. 2001 Resolution of evolutionary conflicts: costly behaviours enforce the evolution of cost-free competition. Evol. Ecol. Res. 3, 829-844.
17. Haygood, R. 2004 Sexual conflict and protein polymorphism. Evolution 58, 1414-1423.
18. Holland, B. & Rice, W. R. 1998 Chase-away sexual selection: antagonistic seduction versus resistance. Evolution 52, 1-7.
19. Hosken, D. & Snook, R. 2005 How important is sexual conflict? Am. Nat. 165, S1-S4. (doi:10.1086/429355)
20. Iwasa, Y. & Pomiankowski, A. 1995 Continual change in mate preferences. Nature 377, 420-422. (doi:10.1038/377420a0)
21. Iwasa, Y., Pomiankowski, A. & Nee, S. 1991 The evolution of costly mate preferences. II. The "handicap" principle. Evolution 45, 1431-1442.
22. Jennions, M. D. & Petrie, M. 2000 Why do females mate multiply? A review of the genetic benefits. Biol. Rev. 75, 21-64. (doi:10.1017/ S0006323199005423)
23. Johnston, R. A. & Keller, L. 2000 How males can gain by harming their mates: sexual conflict, seminal toxins, and the costs of mating. Am. Nat. 156, 368-377. (doi:10.1086/303392)
24. Kolmogorov, A. 1936 Sulla teoria di Volterra della Lotka per l'esistenza. Giornale Instituto Italiano degli Attuari 7, 74-80.
25. Lande, R. 1976 Natural selection and random genetic drift in phenotypic evolution. Evolution 30, 314-334.
26. Lande, R. 1979 Effective deme size during long-term evolution estimated from rates of chromosomal rearrangement. Evolution 33, 234-251.
27. Lande, R. 1981 Models of speciation by sexual selection on polygenic characters. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 78, 3721-3725.
28. Lessells, C. M. 2005 Why are males bad for females? Models for the evolution of damaging male mating behavior. Am. Nat. 165, S46-S63. (doi:10.1086/429356)
29. Oliveira-Pinto, F. & Conolly, B. W. 1982 Applicable mathematics of non-physical phenomena. Chichester: Ellis Horwood.
30. Parker, G. A. 1979 Sexual selection and sexual conflict. In Sexual selection and reproductive competition in insects (ed. M. S. Blum & N. A. Blum), pp. 123-166. New York: Academic Press.
31. Parker, G. A. & Partridge, L. 1998 Sexual conflict and speciation. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 353, 261-274. (doi:10.1098/rstb.1998.0208)
32. Pizzari, T. & Snook, R. R. 2003 Perspective: sexual conflict and sexual selection: chasing away paradigm shifts. Evolution 57, 1223-1236.
33. Prout, T. & Clark, A. G. 1996 Polymorphism in genes that influence sperm displacement. Genetics 144, 401-408.
34. Rice, W. R. 1998 Intergenomic conflict, interlocus antagonistic coevolution, and the evolution of reproductive isolation. In Endless forms: species and speciation (ed. D. J. Howard & S. H. Berlocher), pp. 261-270. New York: Oxford University Press.
35. Rice, W. R. & Holland, B. 1997 The enemies within: intergenomic conflict, interlocus contest evolution (ICE), and intraspecific Red Queen. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 41, 1-10. (doi:10.1007/s002650050357)
36. Rowe, L., Cameron, E. & Day, T. 2003 Detecting sexually antagonistic coevolution with population crosses. Proc. R. Soc. B 270, 2009-2016. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2003.2453)
37. Smith, H. G. & Härdling, R. 2000 Clutch size evolution under sexual conflict enhances the stability of mating systems. Proc. R. Soc. B 267, 2163-2170. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2000.1146)
38. Stockley, P. 1997 Sexual conflict resulting from adaptations to sperm competition. Trends Ecol. Evol. 12, 154-159. (doi:10.1016/S0169-5347(97)01000-8)
39. Sved, J. A. 1981a A two-sex polygenic model for the evolution of premating isolation. I. Deterministic theory for natural populations. Genetics 97, 197-215.
40. Sved, J. A. 1981b A two-sex polygenic model for the evolution of premating isolation. II. Computer simulation of experimental selection procedures. Genetics 97, 217-235.