Male mating success: Preference or prowess? Investigating sexual selection in the laboratory using Drosophila melanogaster

American Biology Teacher

Volumn 69, Issue 6, 2007, Pages 351-358

  Coleman, Seth W ^a   Jensen, Jeffrey S ^b  

^a TEXAS A AND M UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Bldg 142   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANIMALIA; DROSOPHILA MELANOGASTER;

EID: 34548370702     PISSN: 00027685     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1662/0002-7685(2007)69[351:mmspop]2.0.co;2     Document Type: Review

References (22)

1. Andersson, M. (1982). Female choice selects for extreme tail length in a widowbird. Nature, 299, 818-820.
2. Andersson, M. (1994). Sexual Selection. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
3. Bennett, A.T.D., Cuthill, I.C., Partridge, J.C. & Lunau, K. (1997). Ultraviolet plumage colors predict mate preferences in starlings. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 94, 8618-8621.
4. Buchanan, K. L., Spencer, K. A., Goldsmith, A. R. & Catchpole, C. K. (2003). Song as an honest signals of past developmental stress in the European starling (Sturnus vulgaris). Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B, 270, 1149-1156.
5. Civetta, A. (1999). Direct visualization of sperm competition and sperm storage in Drosophila. Current Biology, 9, 841-844.
6. Coleman, S. W., Patricelli, G. L. & Borgia, G. (2004). Variable female preferences drive complex male displays. Nature, 428, 742-745.
7. Clutton-Brock, T.H., Guinness, F.E. & Albon, S.D. (1982). Red deer: Behavior and Ecology of Two Sexes. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
8. Darwin, C. (1871). The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex. New York, NY: D. Appleton Company.
9. Eason, P.K. & Sherman, P.T. (2003). Mate choice in soldier beetles: Field and laboratory experiments that demonstrate sexual selection in action. The American Biology Teacher, 65, 436-443.
10. Eens, M. (1997). Understanding the complex song of the European starling: an integrated ethological approach. Advances in the Study of Behavior, 26, 355-434.
11. Fisher, H.S. & Rosenthal, G.G. (2006). Female swordtail fish use chemical cues to select well-fed mates. Animal Behaviour, 72, 721-725.
12. Fisher, R.A. (1915). The evolution of sexual preference. Eugenics Review, 7, 184-192.
13. Fisher, R.A. (1930). The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
14. Flagg, R. (1988). Carolina Drosophila Manual. Burlington: Carolina Biological Supply Company.
15. Mountjoy, D. J. & Lemon, R. E. (1991). Song as an attractant for male and female European starlings, and the influence of song complexity on their response. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 28, 97-100.
16. National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
17. National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards: A Guide for Teaching and Learning. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
18. Petrie, M. (1994). Improved growth and survival of offspring of peacock's with more elaborate trains. Nature, 371, 598-599.
19. Petrie, M. & Halliday, T. (1994). Experimental and natural changes in the peacock's (Pavo cristatus) train can affect mating success. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 35, 213-217.
20. Pyle, D.W. & Gromko, M.H. (1981). Genetic basis for repeated mating in Drosophila melanogaster. American Naturalist, 117, 133-146.
21. Rosenthal, G.G., Wagner, Jr., W.E. & Ryan, M.J. (2002). Secondary reduction of preference for the sword ornament in the pygmy swordtail Xiphophorus nigrensis (Pisces: Poeciliidae). Animal Behaviour, 63, 37-45.
22. Williams, G.C. (1966). Adaptation and Natural Selection: A Critique of Some Current Evolutionary Thought. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.