Recent social history alters male courtship preferences

Evolution

Volumn 66, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 280-287

  Jordan, Lyndon A ^a   Brooks, Robert C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

Author keywords

Male choice; Plasticity; Reproductive tactics; Social environment

Indexed keywords

BODY SIZE; COURTSHIP; CYPRINID; EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY; FITNESS; LIFE HISTORY TRAIT; MALE BEHAVIOR; PHENOTYPIC PLASTICITY; REPRODUCTIVE STRATEGY; SOCIAL HISTORY;

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BODY SIZE; CYPRINODONTIFORMES; FEMALE; MALE; MATE CHOICE; SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT;

ANIMALS; BODY SIZE; FEMALE; MALE; MATING PREFERENCE, ANIMAL; POECILIA; SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT;

EID: 84855275069     PISSN: 00143820     EISSN: 15585646     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2011.01421.x     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Abrahams M. V. 1993. The trade-off between foraging and courting in male guppies. Anim. Behav. 45:673-681.
2. Amundsen, T., and E. Forsgren. 2001. Male mate choice selects for female coloration in a fish. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 98:13155-13160.
3. Andrade, M. C. B., and M. M. Kasumovic. 2005. Terminal investment strategies and male mate choice: extreme tests of Bateman. Integr. Comp. Biol. 45:838-847.
4. Baerends, G. P., R. Brouwer, and H. T. J. Waterbolk. 1955. Ethological studies onLebistes reticulatus(Peters). 1. An analysis of the male courtship pattern. Behaviour 8:249-334.
5. Bailey, NW, B. Gray, and M. Zuk 2010. Acoustic experience shapes alternative mating tactics and reproductive investment in male field crickets. Curr. Biol. 20:845-849.
6. Bel-Venner, M. C., S. Dray, D. Allaine, F. Menu, and S. Venner. 2008. Unexpected male choosiness for mates in a spider. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 275:77-82.
7. Bischoff, R. J., J. L. Gould, and D. I. Rubenstein. 1985. Tail size and female choice in the Guppy (Poecilia reticulata). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 17:253-255.
8. Blumstein, D. T., C. S. Evans, and J. C. Daniel. 2006. JWATCHER v. 1.0. Pp. See.
9. Bonduriansky, R. 2001. The evolution of male mate choice in insects: a synthesis of ideas and evidence. Biol. Rev. Camb. Philos. Soc. 76: 305-339.
10. Brooks, R. 2002. Variation in female mate choice within guppy populations: population divergence, multiple ornaments and the maintenance of polymorphism. Genetica 116:343-358.
11. Brooks, R., and J. A. Endler. 2001. Female guppies agree to differ: phenotypic and genetic variation in mate-choice behaviour and the consequences for sexual selection. Evolution 55:1644-1655.
12. Byrne, P. G., and W. R. Rice. 2006. Evidence for adaptive male mate choice in the fruit flyDrosophila melanogaster. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 273:917-922.
13. Candolin, U., and T. Salesto. 2009. Does competition allow male mate choosiness in threespine sticklebacks? Am. Nat. 173:273-277.
14. Chaine, A. S., and B. E. Lyon. 2008. Adaptive plasticity in female mate choice dampens sexual selection on male ornaments in the lark bunting. Science 319:459-462.
15. Cornwallis, C. K., and T. Uller. 2010. Towards an evolutionary ecology of sexual traits. Trends Ecol. Evol. 25:145-152.
16. Croft, D. P., J. Krause, and R. James. 2004. Social networks in the guppy (Poecilia reticulata). Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 271:S516-S519.
17. David, P., T. Bjorksten, K. Fowler, and A. Pomiankowski. 2000. Condition-dependent signalling of genetic variation in stalk-eyed flies. Nature 406:186-188.
18. Fawcett, T. W., and R. A. Johnstone. 2003. Mate choice in the face of costly competition. Behav. Ecol. 14:771-779.
19. Godin, J.-G. J., and S. E. Briggs. 1996. Female mate choice under predation risk in the guppy. Anim. Behav. 51:117-130.
20. Gong, A., and R. M. Gibson. 1996. Reversal of a female preference after visual exposure to a predator in the guppy, Poecilia reticulata. Anim. Behav. 52:1007-1015.
21. Guevara-Fiore, P., J. Stapley, and P. J. Watt. 2010. Mating effort and female receptivity: how do male guppies decide when to invest in sex? Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 64:1665-1672.
22. Hardling, R., and H. Kokko. 2005. The evolution of prudent choice. Evol. Ecol. Res. 7:697-715.
23. Hardling, R., T. Gosden, and R. Aguilee. 2008. Male mating constraints affect mutual mate choice: prudent male courting and sperm-limited females. Am. Nat. 172:259-271.
24. Hingle, A., K. Fowler, and A. Pomiankowski. 2001. The effect of transient food stress on female mate preference in the stalk-eyed flyCyrtodiopsis dalmanii. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 268:1239-1244.
25. Houde, A. E. 1987. Mate choice based upon naturally occurring colour-pattern variation in a guppy population. Evolution 41:1-10.
26. Houde, A. E. 1997. Sex, color, and mate choice in guppies. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, NJ.
27. Houde, A. E., and J. A. Endler. 1990. Correlated evolution of female mating preferences and male color patterns in the guppyPoecilia reticulata. Science 248:1405-1408.
28. Jennions, M. D., and M. Petrie. 1997. Variation in mate choice and mating preferences: a review of causes and consequences. Biol. Rev. Camb. Philos. Soc. 72:283-327.
29. Jennions, M. D., P. R. Y. Backwell, and N. I. Passmore. 1995. Repeatability of mate choice: the effect of size in the African painted reed frog, Hyperolius marmoratus. Anim. Behav. 49:181-186.
30. Jirotkul, M. 1999a. Operational sex ratio influences female preference and male-male competition in guppies. Anim. Behav. 58:287-294.
31. Jirotkul, M. 1999b. Population density influences male-male competition in guppies. Anim. Behav. 58:1169-1175.
32. Jordan, L. A., and R. C. Brooks. 2010. The lifetime costs of increased male reproductive effort: courtship, copulation and the Coolidge effect. J. Evol. Biol. 23:2403-2409.
33. Kasumovic, M. M., and M. C. B. Andrade. 2006. Male development tracks rapidly shifting sexual versus natural selection pressures. Curr. Biol. 16:R242-R243.
34. Kodric Brown, A. 1985. Female preference and sexual selection for male coloration in the guppy (Poecilia reticulata). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 17:199-205.
35. Kolluru, G. R., G. F. Grether, E. Dunlop, and S. H. South. 2009. Food availability and parasite infection influence mating tactics in guppies (Poecilia reticulata). Behav. Ecol. 20:131-137.
36. Kotiaho, J. S. 2002. Sexual selection and condition dependence of courtship display in three species of horned dung beetles. Behav. Ecol. 13:791-799.
37. Lehtonen, T. K., B. B. M. Wong, and K. Lindstrom. 2010. Fluctuating mate preferences in a marine fish. Biol. Lett. 6:21-23.
38. López, S. 1999. Parasitized female guppies do not prefer showy males. Anim. Behav. 57:1129-1134.
39. Murphy, C. G., and H. C. Gerhardt. 2000. Mating preference functions of individual female barking treefrogs, Hyla gratiosa, for two properties of male advertisement calls. Evolution 54:660-669.
40. Oh, K. P., and A. V. Badyaev. 2010. Structure of social networks in a passerine bird: consequences for sexual selection and the evolution of mating strategies. Am. Nat. 176:E80-E89.
41. Parker, G. A. 1974. Courtship persistence and female-guarding as male time investment strategies. Behaviour 48:157-184.
42. Partridge, L. 1988. The rare-male effect: what is its evolutionary significance Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 319:525-539.
43. Patricelli, G. L., J. A. C. Uy, G. Walsh, and G. Borgia. 2002. Male displays adjusted to female's response-Macho courtship by the satin bowerbird is tempered to avoid frightening the female. Nature 415:279-280.
44. Pitcher, T. E., B. D. Neff, F. H. Rodd, and L. Rowe. 2003. Multiple mating and sequential mate choice in guppies: females trade up. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 270:1623-1629.
45. Preston, B. T., I. R. Stevenson, and K. Wilson. 2003. Soay rams target reproductive activity towards promiscuous females' optimal insemination period. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 270:2073-2078.
46. Qvarnström A. 2001. Context-dependent genetic benefits from mate choice. Trends Ecol. Evol. 16:5-7.
47. Qvarnström A., T. Pärt, and B. Sheldon. 2000. Adaptive plasticity in mate preference linked to differences in reproductive effort. Nature 405:344-347.
48. Ritchie, M. G. 1992. Variation in male song and female preferences within a population ofEphippiger ephippiger(Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae). Anim. Behav. 43:845-855.
49. Rosenqvist, G., and A. Houde. 1997. Prior exposure to male phenotypes influences mate choice in the guppy, Poecilia reticulata. Behav. Ecol. 8:194-198.
50. Royle, N. J., and T. W. Pike. 2010. Social feedback and attractiveness in zebra finches. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 64:2015-2020.
51. Shine, R., T. Langkilde, and R. T. Mason. 2003. The opportunistic serpent: male garter snakes adjust courtship tactics to mating opportunities. Behaviour 140:1509-1526.
52. Svensson, P. A., T. K. Lehtonen, and B. B. M. Wong. 2010. The interval between sexual encounters affects male courtship tactics in a desert-dwelling fish. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 64:1967-1970.
53. Venner, S., C. Bernstein, S. Dray, and M. C. Bel-Venner. 2010. Make love lot war: when should less competitive males choose low-quality but defendable females? Am. Nat. 175:650-661.
54. Verrell, P. A. 1985. Female availability and multiple courtship in male red-spotted newts, Notophthalmus viridescens(Amphibia)-decisions that maximize male mating success. Behaviour 94:244-253.
55. Xu, J., and Q. Wang. 2009. Male moths undertake both pre- and in-copulation mate choice based on female age and weight. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 63:801-808.