Learning rules for optimal selection in a varying environment: Mate choice revisited

Behavioral Ecology

Volumn 17, Issue 5, 2006, Pages 799-809

  Collins, Edmund J ^a   McNamara, John M ^a   Ramsey, David M ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL   (United Kingdom)

^b WROCLAW UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Poland)

Author keywords

Bayesian model; Evolution of learning rules; Genetic algorithm; Sequential search; Sexual selection; Spatially varying environment

Indexed keywords

BAYESIAN ANALYSIS; GENETIC ALGORITHM; LEARNING; MATE CHOICE; PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT; REPRODUCTIVE SUCCESS; SPATIAL VARIATION;

ANIMALIA;

EID: 33747838445     PISSN: 10452249     EISSN: 14657279     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/beheco/arl008     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Alatalo RV, Carlson A, Lundberg A. 1988. The search cost in mate choice of the pied flycatcher. Anim Behav 36:289-91.
2. Axelrod R. 1987. The evolution of strategies in the iterated prisoner's dilemma. In: Davis L, editor. Genetic algorithms and simulated annealing. Los Altos, CA: Morgan Kaufmann publishers Inc. p 32-41.
3. Bakker TCM, Milinski M. 1991. Sequential mate choice and the previous male effect in sticklebacks. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 29:205-10.
4. Bergstrom CT, Real LA. 2000. Towards a theory of mutual mate choice: lessons from two-sided matching. Evol Ecol Res 2:493-508.
5. Collins EJ, McNamara JM. 1993. The job-search problem with competition: an evolutionarily stable dynamic strategy. Adv Appl Probab 25:314-33.
6. Collins SA. 1995. The effect of recent experience on female choice in zebra finches. Anim Behav 49:479-86.
7. DeGroot MH. 1970. Optimal statistical decisions. New York: McGraw-Hill.
8. Dombrovsky Y, Perrin N. 1994. On adaptive search and optimal stopping in sequential mate choice. Am Nat 144:355-61.
9. Downhower JF, Lank DB. 1994. Effect of previous experience on mate choice by female mottled sculpins. Anim Behav 47:369-72.
10. Fawcett TW, Johnstone RA. 2003a. Mate choice in the face of costly competition. Behav Ecol 14:771-9.
11. Fawcett TW, Johnstone RA. 2003b. Optimal assessment of multiple cues. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 270:1637-43.
12. Houston AI, McNamara JM. 1999. Models of adaptive behaviour. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
13. Hutchinson JMC, Halupka K. 2004. Mate choice when males are in patches: optimal strategies and good rules of thumb. J Theor Biol 231:129-51.
14. Janetos AC. 1980. Strategies of female mate choice: a theoretical analysis. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 7:107-12.
15. Johnstone RA. 1997. The tactics of mutual mate choice and competitive search. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 40:51-9.
16. Lewontin RC, Cohen D. 1969. On population growth in a randomly varying environment. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 62:1056-60.
17. Luttbeg B. 1996. A comparative Bayes tactic for mate assessment and choice. Behav Ecol 7:451-60.
18. Luttbeg B. 2002. Assessing the robustness and optimality of alternative decision rules with varying assumptions. Anim Behav 63:805-14.
19. Mazalov V, Perrin N, Dombrovsky Y. 1996. Adaptive search and information updating in sequential mate choice. Am Nat 148:123-37.
20. McNamara JM, Collins EJ. 1990. The job-search problem as an employer-candidate game. J Appl Probab 28:815-27.
21. Milinski M, Bakker TCM. 1992. Costs influence sequential mate choice in sticklebacks, Gasterosteus aculeatus. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 250:229-33.
22. Parker GA. 1983. Mate quality and mating decisions. In: Bateson P, editor. Mate choice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. p 141-66.
23. Ramsey DM. 1994. Models of evolution, interaction and learning in sequential decision processes [dissertation]. Bristol, UK: Department of Mathematics, University of Bristol.
24. Real L. 1990. Search theory and mate choice. I. Models of single-sex discrimination. Am Nat 136:376-404.
25. Simao J, Todd PM. 2002. Modelling mate choice in monogamous mating systems with courtship. Adapt Behav 10:113-36.
26. Svensson EI, Sinervo B. 2004. Spatial scale and temporal component of selection in side-blotched lizards. Am Nat 163:726-34.
27. Wong BBM, Candolin U. 2005. How is female mate choice affected by male competition. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 80:559-71.