The evolution of experience-mediated plasticity in mate preferences

Journal of Evolutionary Biology

Volumn 25, Issue 9, 2012, Pages 1855-1863

  Fowler Finn, Kasey D ^a   Rodriguez R L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MILWAUKEE   (United States)

Author keywords

Evolution of plasticity; Plastic mate preference; Preference function; Social experience

Indexed keywords

EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY; HYPOTHESIS TESTING; LIFE HISTORY TRAIT; MATE CHOICE; PHENOTYPIC PLASTICITY; PLANTHOPPER; PREFERENCE BEHAVIOR; SEXUAL SELECTION; SIGNAL; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR;

ADAPTIVE BEHAVIOR; ANIMAL; ANIMAL COMMUNICATION; ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; EVOLUTION; FEMALE; HEMIPTERA; MALE; MATE CHOICE; PHYSIOLOGY; SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT; SPECIES DIFFERENCE; STATISTICAL MODEL;

ADAPTATION, PSYCHOLOGICAL; ANIMAL COMMUNICATION; ANIMALS; BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; FEMALE; HEMIPTERA; LINEAR MODELS; MALE; MATING PREFERENCE, ANIMAL; SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT; SPECIES SPECIFICITY;

ENCHENOPA; HEMIPTERA; MEMBRACIDAE;

EID: 84865197824     PISSN: 1010061X     EISSN: 14209101     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1420-9101.2012.02573.x     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Andersson, M. 1994. Sexual Selection. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
2. Bailey, N.W. 2008. Love will tear you apart: different components of female choice exert contrasting selection pressures on male field crickets. Behav. Ecol. 19: 960-966.
3. Bailey, N.W. & Zuk, M. 2008. Acoustic experience shapes female mate choice in field crickets. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 275: 2645-2650.
4. Bailey, N.W. & Zuk, M. 2009. Field crickets change mating preferences using remembered social information. Biol. Lett. 5: 449-451.
5. Beckers, O.M. & Schul, J. 2010. Female adaptation to developmental plasticity in male calling behavior. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 64: 1279-1290.
6. Brooks, R. & Endler, J.A. 2001. Female guppies agree to differ: phenotypic and genetic variation in mate-choice behavior and the consequences for sexual selection. Evolution 55: 1644-1655.
7. Chaine, A.S. & Lyon, B.E. 2008. Adaptive plasticity in female mate choice dampens sexual selection on male ornaments in the lark bunting. Science 319: 459-462.
8. Cocroft, R.B., Rodríguez, R.L., Hunt, R.E. 2008. Host shifts, the evolution of communication and speciation in the Enchenopa binotata complex of treehoppers. In: Specialization, Speciation, and Radiation: The Evolutionary Biology of Herbivorous Insects (K. Tilmon, ed.), pp. 88-100. University of California Press, Berkeley.
9. Cocroft, R.B., Rodríguez, R.L., Hunt, R.E. 2010. Host shifts and signal divergence: mating signals covary with host use in a complex of specialized plant-feeding insects. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 99: 60-72.
10. Collins, S.A. 1995. The effect of recent experience on female choice in zebra finches. Anim. Behav. 49: 479-486.
11. Cotton, S., Small, J., Pomiankowski, A. 2006. Sexual selection and condition-dependent mate preferences. Curr. Biol. 16: R755-R765.
12. Danchin, E., Giraldeau, L.A., Valone, T.J., Wagner, R.H. 2004. Public information: from nosy neighbors to cultural evolution. Science 305: 487-491.
13. Dewinter, A.J. & Rollenhagen, T. 1993. Differences in preference for species-specific female calls between acoustically experienced and acoustically naive male Ribautodelphax planthoppers (Homoptera, Delphacidae). J. Insect Behav. 6: 411-419.
14. Dukas, R. 2006. Learning in the context of sexual behaviour in insects. Anim. Biol. 56: 125-141.
15. Fowler-Finn, K.D. & Rodríguez, R.L. 2012. Experience-mediated plasticity in mate preferences: mating assurance in a variable environment. Evolution 66: 459-468.
16. Getty, T. 1995. Search, discrimination, and selection: mate choice by pied flycatchers. Am. Nat. 148: 378-385.
17. Hampton, K.J., Hughes, K.A., Houde, A.E. 2009. The allure of the distinctive: reduced sexual responsiveness of female guppies to 'redundant' male colour patterns. Ethology 115: 475-481.
18. Hebets, E.A. 2003. Subadult experience influences adult mate choice in an arthropod: exposed female wolf spiders prefer males of a familiar phenotype. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 100: 13390-13395.
19. Hebets, E.A. & Sullivan-Beckers, L. 2010. Mate choice and learning. In: Encylcopedia of Animal Behavior, Vol. 2 (M.D. Breed & J. Moore, eds), pp. 389-393. Academic Press, London, Oxford.
20. Hebets, E.A. & Vink, C.J. 2007. Experience leads to preference: experienced females prefer brush-legged males in a population of syntopic wolf spiders. Behav. Ecol. 18: 765-771.
21. Janetos, A.C. 1980. Strategies of female mate choice: a theoretical analysis. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 7: 107-112.
22. Jennions, M.D. & Petrie, M. 1997. Variation in mate choice and mating preferences: a review of causes and consequences. Biol. Rev. Camb. Philos. Soc. 72: 283-327.
23. Knoppien, P. 1985. Rare male mating advantage: a review. Biol. Rev. 60: 81-117.
24. Kokko, H., Brooks, R., McNamara, J.M., Houston, A.I. 2002. The sexual selection continuum. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 269: 1331-1340.
25. Kokko, H., Jennions, M.D., Brooks, R. 2006. Unifying and testing models of sexual selection. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 37: 43-66.
26. Kozak, G.M. & Boughman, J.W. 2009. Learned conspecific mate preference in a species pair of sticklebacks. Behav. Ecol. 20: 1282-1288.
27. Lesna, I. & Sabelis, M.W. 1999. Diet-dependent female choice for males with 'good genes' in a soil predatory mite. Nature 401: 581-584.
28. Lin, C.P. & Wood, T.K. 2002. Molecular phylogeny of the North American Enchenopa binotata (Homoptera: Membracidae) species complex. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 95: 162-171.
29. Magurran, A.E. & Ramnarine, I.W. 2004. Learned mate recognition and reproductive isolation in guppies. Anim. Behav. 67: 1077-1082.
30. Mariette, M.M., Zajitschek, S.R.K., Garcia, C.M., Brooks, R.C. 2010. The effects of familiarity and group size on mating preferences in the guppy, Poecilia reticulata. J. Evol. Biol. 23: 1772-1782.
31. McPeek, M.A. & Gavrilets, S. 2006. The evolution of female mating preferences: differentiation from species with promiscuous males can promote speciation. Evolution 60: 1967-1980.
32. Meyer, K. & Kirkpatrick, M. 2005. Up hill, down dale: quantitative genetics of curvaceous traits. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 360: 1443-1455.
33. Milinski, M. & Bakker, T.C.M. 1992. Costs influence sequential mate choice in stickleback, Gasterosteus aculeatus. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 250: 229-233.
34. Miller, M.N. & Fincke, O.M. 1999. Cues for mate recognition and the effect of prior experience on mate recognition in Enallagma damselflies. J. Insect Behav. 12: 801-814.
35. Nakagawa, S. & Cuthill, I.C. 2007. Effect size, confidence interval and statistical significance: a practical guide for biologists. Biol. Rev. 82: 591-605.
36. Qvarnström, A. 2001. Context-dependent genetic benefits from mate choice. Trends Ecol. Evol. 16: 5-7.
37. Real, L. 1990. Search theory and mate choice. I. Models of single-sex discrimination. Am. Nat. 136: 376-405.
38. Ritchie, M.G. 1996. The shape of female mating preferences. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 93: 14628-14631.
39. Rodríguez, R.L., Sullivan, L.E., Cocroft, R.B. 2004. Vibrational communication and reproductive isolation in the Enchenopa binotata species complex of treehoppers (Hemiptera: Membracidae). Evolution 58: 571-578.
40. Rodríguez, R.L., Ramaswamy, K., Cocroft, R.B. 2006. Evidence that female preferences have shaped male signal evolution in a clade of specialized plant-feeding insects. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 273: 2585-2593.
41. Schluter, D. 1988. Estimating the form of natural selection on a quantitative trait. Evolution 42: 849-861.
42. Servedio, M.R. et al. 2009. Reinforcement and learning. Evol. Ecol. 23: 109-123.
43. Shettleworth, S.J. 2010. Cognition, Evolution, and Behavior. Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
44. Sullivan-Beckers, L. & Cocroft, R.B. 2010. The importance of female choice, male-male competition, and signal transmission as causes of selection on male mating signals. Evolution 64: 3158-3171.
45. Tramm, N.A. & Servedio, M.R. 2008. Evolution of mate-choice imprinting: competing strategies. Evolution 62: 1991-2003.
46. Valone, T.J. & Templeton, J.J. 2002. Public information for the assessment of quality: a widespread social phenomenon. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 357: 1549-1557.
47. Verzijden, M.N., Lachlan, R.F., Servedio, M.R. 2005. Female mate-choice behavior and sympatric speciation. Evolution 59: 2097-2108.
48. Wagner, W.E. 1998. Measuring female mating preferences. Anim. Behav. 55: 1029-1042.
49. Wagner, W.E., Murray, A.M., Cade, W.H. 1995. Phenotypic variation in the mating preferences of female crickets, Gryllus integer. Anim. Behav. 49: 1269-1281.
50. Wagner, W.E., Smeds, M.R., Wiegmann, D.D. 2001. Experience affects female responses to male song in the variable field cricket Gryllus lineaticeps (Orthoptera, Gryllidae). Ethology 107: 769-776.
51. Walling, C.A., Royle, N.J., Lindstrom, J., Metcalfe, N.B. 2008. Experience-induced preference for short-sworded males in the green swordtail, Xiphophorus helleri. Anim. Behav. 76: 271-276.
52. West-Eberhard, M.J. 1983. Sexual selection, social competition, and speciation. Q. Rev. Biol. 58: 155-183.
53. Wood, T.K. 1993. Diversity in the new world Membracidae. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 38: 409-435.
54. Wood, T.K. & Guttman, S.I. 1983. Enchenopa binotata complex: sympatric speciation? Science 220: 310-312.