Testing the sexy son hypothesis - A research framework for empirical approaches

Behavioral Ecology

Volumn 19, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 456-461

  Huk, Thomas ^a,b   Winkel, Wolfgang ^a  

^a INSTITUTE OF AVIAN RESEARCH VOGELWARTE HELGOLAND   (Germany)

^b TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF BRAUNSCHWEIG   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY; HYPOTHESIS TESTING; MATE CHOICE;

EID: 52449110551     PISSN: 10452249     EISSN: 14657279     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/beheco/arm150     Document Type: Review

References (73)

1. Alatalo RV. 1998. Mate choice for offspring performance: major benefits or minor costs? Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 265:2297-2297.
2. Alatalo RV, Lundberg A. 1986. The sexy son hypothesis: data from the pied flycatcher Ficedula-Hypoleuca. Anim Behav. 34:1454-1462.
3. Alatalo RV, Lundberg A, Stahlbrandt K. 1982. Why do pied flycatcher females mate with already-mated males? Anim Behav. 30:585-593.
4. Alatalo RV, Ratti O. 1995. Sexy son hypothesis - controversial once more. Trends Ecol Evol. 10:52-53.
5. Andersson M. 1994. Sexual selection. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press.
6. Andersson S, Simmons LW. 2006. Sexual selection and mate choice. Trends Ecol Evol. 21:296-302.
7. Arnqvist G, Kirkpatrick M. 2005. The evolution of infidelity in socially monogamous passerines: the strength of direct and indirect selection on extrapair copulation behavior in females. Am Nat. 165:S26-S37.
8. Arnqvist G, Rowe L. 2005. Sexual conflict. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press.
9. Bakker TCM. 1993. Positive genetic correlation between female preference and preferred male ornaments in sticklebacks. Nature. 363:255-257.
10. Barber I, Arnott SA, Braithwaite VA, Andrew J, Huntingford FA. 2001. Indirect fitness consequences of mate choice in sticklebacks: offspring of brighter males grow slowly but resist parasitic infections. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 268:71-76.
11. Barbosa M, Magurran AE. 2006. Female mating decisions: maximizing fitness? J Fish Biol. 68:1636-1661.
12. Both C. 2002. Fitness costs of polygyny in female pied flycatchers Ficedula hypoleuca. Ardea. 90:129-138.
13. Burley N. 1981. Sex ratio manipulation and selection for attractiveness. Science. 211:721-722.
14. Byers JA, Waits L. 2006. Good genes sexual selection in nature. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 103:16343-16345.
15. Cameron E, Day T, Rowe L. 2003. Sexual conflict and indirect benefits. J Evol Biol. 16:1055-1060.
16. Charmantier A, Sheldon BC. 2006. Testing genetic models of mate choice evolution in the wild. Trends Ecol Evol. 21:417-419.
17. Dreiss A, Richard M, Moyen F, White J, Møller AP, Danchin E. 2006. Sex ratio and male sexual characters in a population of blue tits, Parus caeruleus. Behav Ecol. 17:13-19.
18. Forsman A, Hagman M. 2006. Calling is an honest indicator of paternal genetic quality in poison frogs. Evolution. 60:2148-2157.
19. Garamszegi LZ, Török J, Michl G, Møller AP. 2004. Female survival, lifetime reproductive success and mating status in a passerine bird. Oecologia. 138:48-56.
20. Gavrilets S, Arnqvist G, Friberg U. 2001. The evolution of female mate choice by sexual conflict. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 268:531-539.
21. Griffith SC, Ornborg J, Russell AF, Andersson S, Sheldon BC. 2003. Correlations between ultraviolet coloration, overwinter survival and offspring sex ratio in the blue tit. J Evol Biol. 16:1045-1054.
22. Griffith SC, Owens IPF, Thuman KA. 2002. Extra pair paternity in birds: a review of interspecific variation and adaptive function. Mol Ecol. 11:2195-2212.
23. Gustafsson L, Qvarnström A. 2006. A test of the "sexy son" hypothesis: sons of polygynous collared flycatchers do not inherit their fathers' mating status. Am Nat. 167:297-302.
24. Gustafsson L, Qvarnström A, Sheldon BC. 1995. Trade-offs between life-history traits and a secondary sexual character in male collared flycatchers. Nature. 375:311-313.
25. Gwinner H, Schwabl H. 2005. Evidence for sexy sons in European starlings (Sturnus vulgaris). Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 58:375-382.
26. Hadfield JD, Burgess MD, Lord A, Phillimre AB, Clegg SM, Owens IP. 2006. Direct versus indirect sexual selection: genetic basis of colour, size and recruitment in a wild bird. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 273:1347-1353.
27. Hasselquist D. 1998. Polygyny in great reed warblers: a long-term study of factors contributing to male fitness. Ecology. 79:2376-2390.
28. Head ML, Hunt J, Jennions MD, Brooks R. 2005. The indirect benefits of mating with attractive males outweigh the direct costs. PLoS Biol. 3:289-294.
29. Houtman AM. 1992. Female zebra finches choose extra-pair copulations with genetically attractive males. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 249:3-6.
30. Huk T, Winkel W. 2006. Polygyny and its fitness consequences for primary and secondary female pied flycatchers. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 273:1681-1688.
31. Hunt J, Bussière LF, Jennions MD, Brooks R. 2004. What is genetic quality? Trends Ecol Evol. 19:329-333.
32. Iwasa Y, Pomiankowski A. 1999. Good parent and good genes models of handicap evolution. J Theor Biol. 200:97-109.
33. Johnson IS, Kermott LH, Lein MR. 1994. Territorial polygyny in house wrens - are females sufficiently compensated for the cost of mate sharing? Behav Ecol. 5:98-104.
34. Kirkpatrick M. 1985. Evolution of female choice and male parental investment in polygynous species - the demise of the sexy son. Am Nat. 125:788-810.
35. Kirkpatrick M, Barton NH. 1997. The strength of indirect selection on female mating preferences. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 94:1282-1286.
36. Kirkpatrick M, Ryan MJ. 1991. The evolution of mating preferences and the paradox of the lek. Nature. 350:33-38.
37. Kokko H, Brooks R, McNamara JM, Houston AI. 2002. The sexual selection continuum. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 269:1331-1340.
38. Leitner S, Marshall RC, Leisler B, Catchpole CK. 2006. Male song quality, egg size and offspring sex in captive canaries (Serinus canaria). Ethology. 112:554-563.
39. Lessells CM. 2006. The evolutionary outcome of sexual conflict. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B. 361:301-317.
40. Ligon JD. 1999. The evolution of avian breeding systems. New York: Oxford University Press.
41. McNamara JM, Houston AI, dos Santos MM, Kokko H, Brooks R. 2003. Quantifying male attractiveness. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 270:1925-1932.
42. Moreno J, Veiga JP, Romasanta M, Sánchez S. 2002. Effects of maternal quality and mating status on female reproductive success in the polygynous spotless starling. Anim Behav. 64:197-206.
43. Neff BD, Pitcher TE. 2005. Genetic quality and sexual selection: an integrated framework for good genes and compatible genes. Mol Ecol. 14:19-38.
44. Nishiumi I. 1998. Brood sex ratio is dependent on female mating status in polygynous great reed warblers. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 44:9-14.
45. Norris K. 1993. Heritable variation in a plumage indicator of viability in male great tits Parus major. Nature. 362:537-539.
46. Olsson M, Wapstra E, Uller T. 2005. Differential sex allocation in sand lizards: bright males induce daughter production in a species with heteromorphic sex chromosomes. Biol Lett. 1:378-380.
47. Orians GH. 1969. On the evolution of mating systems in birds and mammals. Am Nat. 103:589-602.
48. Orteiza N, Linder JE, Rice WR. 2005. Sexy sons from re-mating do not recoup the direct costs of harmful male interactions in the Drosophila melanogaster laboratory model system. J Evol Biol. 18:1315-1323.
49. Pai AT, Yan GY. 2002. Polyandry produces sexy sons at the cost of daughters in red flour beetles. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 269:361-368.
50. Parker GA. 2006. Sexual conflict over mating and fertilization: an overview. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B. 361:235-259.
51. Parker TH. 2005. No evidence for adaptive differential sex allocation in red junglefowl (Gallus Gallus). Auk. 122:1161-1168.
52. Pike TW, Petrie M. 2005. Offspring sex ratio is related to paternal train elaboration and yolk corticosterone in peafowl. Biol Lett. 1:204-207.
53. Pribil S, Searcy WA. 2001. Experimental confirmation of the polygyny threshold model for red-winged blackbirds. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 268:1643-1646.
54. Price T, Schluter D, Heckman NE. 1993. Sexual selection when the female directly benefits. Biol J Linn Soc. 48:187-211.
55. Qvarnström A, Brommer JE, Gustafsson L. 2006. Testing the genetics underlying the co-evolution of mate choice and ornament in the wild. Nature. 441:84-86.
56. Radwan J. 2002. Good genes go fisherian. Trends Ecol Evol. 17:539-539.
57. Rice WR, Stewart AD, Morrow EH, Linder JE, Orteiza N, Byrne PG. 2006. Assessing sexual conflict in the Drosophila melanogaster laboratory model system. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B. 361:287-299.
58. Rundle HD, Odeen A, Mooers AO. 2007. An experimental test for indirect benefits in Drosophila melanogaster. BMC Evol Biol. 7:36.
59. Searcy WA, Yasukawa K. 1989. Alternative models of territorial polygyny in birds. Am Nat. 134:323-343.
60. Sheldon BC, Andersson S, Griffith SC, Örnberg J, Sendecka J. 1999. Ultraviolet colour variation influences blue tit sex ratios. Nature. 402:874-877.
61. Siitari H, Honkavaara J, Huhta E, Viitala J. 2002. Ultraviolet reflection and female mate choice in the pied flycatcher, Ficedula hypoleuca. Anim Behav. 63:97-102.
62. Simmons LW. 2003. The evolution of polyandry: patterns of genotypic variation in female mating frequency, male fertilization success and a test of the sexy-sperm hypothesis. J Evol Biol. 16:624-634.
63. Slagsvold T, Dale S. 1994. Why do female pied flycatchers mate with already mated males - deception or restricted mate sampling. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 34:239-250.
64. Slagsvold T, Drevon T. 1999. Female pied flycatchers trade between male quality and mating status in mate choice. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 266:917-921.
65. Temrin H, Arak A. 1989. Polyterritoriality and deception in passerine birds. Trends Ecol Evol. 4:106-109.
66. Thrall PH, Antonovics J, Dobson AP. 2000. Sexually transmitted diseases in polygynous mating systems: prevalence and impact on reproductive success. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 267:1555-1563.
67. Wagner RH. 1994. Mixed mating strategies by females weaken the sexy son hypothesis. Anim Behav. 47:1207-1209.
68. Weatherhead PJ. 1984. Mate choice in avian polygyny. Am Nat. 123:873-875.
69. Weatherhead PJ. 1994. Mixed mating strategies by females may strengthen the sexy son hypothesis. Anim Behav. 47:1210-1211.
70. Weatherhead PJ, Robertson RJ. 1979. Offspring quality and the polygyny threshold: "the sexy son hypothesis." Am Nat. 113:201-208.
71. Westerdahl H, Bensch S, Hansson B, Hasselquist D, von Schantz T. 2000. Brood sex ratios, female harem status and resources for nestling provisioning in the great reed warbler (Acrocephalus arundinaceus). Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 47:312-318.
72. Whittier TS, Kaneshiro KY. 1995. Intersexual selection in the Mediterranean fruit-fly - does female choice enhance fitness. Evolution. 49:990-996.
73. Wiehn J. 1997. Plumage characteristics as an indicator of male parental quality in the American Kestrel. J Avian Biol. 28:47-55.