Female choosiness leads to the evolution of individually distinctive males

Evolution

Volumn 66, Issue 12, 2012, Pages 3736-3742

  Thom, Michael D F ^a   Dytham, Calvin ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Agent based model; Behavior; Individual recognition; Models simulations; Sexual selection; Signal diversity

Indexed keywords

ADAPTATION; AGONISTIC BEHAVIOR; ASSESSMENT METHOD; BEHAVIORAL ECOLOGY; DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS; ECOLOGICAL MODELING; FEMALE; MALE; MATE CHOICE; MIMICRY; POPULATION DISTRIBUTION; SEXUAL SELECTION; SIGNAL; SPECIES DIVERSITY; TAXONOMY;

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; EVOLUTION; FEMALE; MALE; MATE CHOICE;

ANIMALS; BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION; FEMALE; MALE; MATING PREFERENCE, ANIMAL; MODELS, GENETIC;

EID: 84870552867     PISSN: 00143820     EISSN: 15585646     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2012.01732.x     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Allen, G. E., and C. Dytham. 2009. An efficient method for stochastic simulation of biological populations in continuous time. Biosystems 98:37-42.
2. Aquiloni, L., and F. Gherardi. 2010. Crayfish females eavesdrop on fighting males and use smell and sight to recognize the identity of the winner. Anim. Behav. 79:265-269.
3. Burgener, N., M. Dehnhard, H. Hofer, and M. L. East. 2009. Does anal gland scent signal identity in the spotted hyaena? Anim. Behav. 77:707-715.
4. Cheetham, S. A., M. D. Thom, F. Jury, W. E. R. Ollier, R. J. Beynon, and J. L. Hurst. 2007. The genetic basis of individual recognition signals in the mouse. Curr. Biol. 17:1771-1777.
5. Clutton-Brock, T., and K. McAuliffe. 2009. Female mate choice in mammals. Quart. Rev. Biol. 84:3-27.
6. Dale, J., D. B. Lank, and H. K. Reeve. 2001. Signaling individual identity versus quality: a model and case studies with ruffs, queleas, and house finches. Am. Nat. 158:75-86.
7. Gillespie, D. T. 1977. Exact stochastic simulation of coupled chemical reactions. J. Phys. Chem. 81:2340-2361.
8. Giuggioli, L., J. R. Potts, and S. Harris. 2011. Animal interactions and the emergence of territoriality. PLoS Comput. Biol. 7:e1002008.
9. Halliday, T. R. 1983. The study of mate choice. Pp. 3-32 in P. Bateson, ed. Mate choice. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, U.K.
10. Hunt, J., L. F. Bussière, M. D. Jennions, and R. Brooks. 2004. What is genetic quality? Trends. Ecol. Evol. 19:329-333.
11. Hurst, J. L. 2009. Female assessment and recognition of males through scent. Behav. Brain Res. 200:295-303.
12. Hurst, J. L., R. J. Beynon, R. E. Humphries, N. Malone, C. M. Nevison, C. E. Payne, D. H. L. Robertson, and C. Veggerby. 2001. Information in scent signals of status: the interface between behaviour and chemistry. Pp. 43-50 in A. Marchlewska-Koj, D. Muller-Schwarze, and J. Lepri, eds. Chemical signals in vertebrates. Plenum Press, New York.
13. Hurst, J. L., M. D. Thom, C. M. Nevison, R. E. Humphries, and R. J. Beynon. 2005. MHC odours are not required or sufficient for recognition of individual scent owners. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 272:715-724.
14. Insley, S. J. 2000. Long-term vocal recognition in the northern fur seal. Nature 406:404-405.
15. Johnstone, R. A. 1997. Recognition and the evolution of distinctive signatures: when does it pay to reveal identity? Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 264:1547-1553.
16. Johnstone, R. A., and D. J. D. Earn. 1999. Imperfect female choice and male mating skew on leks of different sizes. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 45:277-281.
17. Peake, T. M., P. K. McGregor, K. W. Smith, G. Tyler, G. Gilbert, and R. E. Green. 1998. Individuality in corncrake Crex crex vocalizations. Ibis 140:120-127.
18. Pollard, K. A., and D. T. Blumstein. 2011. Social group size predicts the evolution of individuality. Curr. Biol. 21:413-417.
19. R Development Core Team. 2011. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Available via http://www.R-project.org/.
20. Roff, D. A. 1998. Evolution of threshold traits: the balance between directional selection, drift and mutation. Heredity 80:25-32.
21. Sheehan, M. J., and E. A. Tibbetts. 2009. Evolution of identity signals: frequency-dependent benefits of distinctive phenotypes used for individual recognition. Evolution 63:3106-3113.
22. Taylor, M. L., N. Wedell, and D. J. Hosken. 2007. The heritability of attractiveness. Curr. Biol. 17:R959-R960.
23. Thom, M. D., and J. L. Hurst. 2004. Individual recognition by scent. Ann. Zool. Fenn. 41:765-787.
24. Tibbetts, E. A. 2002. Visual signals of individual identity in the wasp Polistes fuscatus. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 269:1423-1428.
25. Tibbetts, E. A., and J. Dale. 2007. Individual recognition: it's good to be different. Trends. Ecol. Evol. 22:529-537.