Evolution of displays within the pair bond

Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

Volumn 280, Issue 1757, 2013, Pages

  Servedio, Maria R ^a   Price, Trevor D ^b   Lande, Russell ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

^c IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Fecundity selection; Monogamy; Parental investment; Sexual selection; Social displays; Social selection

Indexed keywords

AVIFAUNA; DISPLAY BEHAVIOR; EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS; EUSOCIALITY; EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY; FECUNDITY; MONOGAMY; PAIR BOND; PARENT-OFFSPRING INTERACTION; REPRODUCTIVE COST; SEXUAL SELECTION; WATERFOWL;

EID: 84874230001     PISSN: 09628452     EISSN: 14712954     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2012.3020     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Reichard U, Boesch C. 2003 Monogamy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
2. van de Pol M, Heg D, Bruinzeel LW, Kuijper B, Verhulst S. 2006 Experimental evidence for a causal effect of pair-bond duration on reproductive performance in oystercatchers (Haematopus ostralegus). Behav. Ecol. 17, 982-991. (doi:10.1093/beheco/arl036)
3. Dunn PO, Whittingham LA, Pitcher TE. 2001 Mating systems, sperm competition, and the evolution of sexual dimorphism in birds. Evolution 55, 161-175.
4. Huxley JS. 1914 The courtship habits of the great crested grebe (Podiceps cristatus). Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond. 35, 491-562.
5. Huxley JS. 1923 Courtship activities in the redthroated diver; together with a discussion of the evolution of courtship in birds. J. Linn. Soc. 35, 253-292. (doi:10.1111/j.1096-3642.1923.tb00048.x)
6. Huxley JS. 1938 Darwin's theory of sexual selection and the data subsumed by it, in the light of recent research. Am. Nat. 72, 416-433. (doi:10.1086/280795)
7. Price T. 2008 Speciation in birds. Boulder, CO: Roberts and Co.
8. Morales J, Alonso-Alvarez C, Perez C, Torres R, Serafino E, Velando A. 2009 Families on the spot: sexual signals influence parent-offspring interactions. Proc. R. Soc. B 276, 2477-2483. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2008.1942)
9. Burley N. 1988 The differential allocation hypothesis: an experimental test. Am. Nat. 132, 611-628. (doi:10.1086/284877)
10. Matessi G, Carmagnani C, Griggio M, Pilastro A. 2009 Male rock sparrows differentially allocate nest defence but not food provisioning to offspring. Behaviour 146, 209-223. (doi:10.1163/156853909X410748)
11. Griggio M, Serra L, Licheri D, Monti A, Pilastro A. 2007 Armaments and ornaments in the rock sparrow: a possible dual utility of a carotenoidbased feather signal. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 61, 423-433. (doi:10.1007/s00265-006-0270-5)
12. Griggio M, Valera F, Casas A, Pilastro A. 2005 Males prefer ornamented females: a field experiment of male choice in the rock sparrow. Anim. Behav. 69, 1243-1250. (doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2004.10.004)
13. Lehrman DS, Brody PN, Wortis RP. 1961 The presence of the mate and of nesting material as stimuli for the development of incubation behavior and for gonadotropin secretion in the ring dove (Strepopelia risoria). Endocrinology 68, 507-516. (doi:10.1210/endo-68-3-507)
14. Velando A, Beamonté-Barrientos R, Torres R. 2006 Pigment-based skin colour in the blue-footed booby: an honest signal of current condition used by females to adjust reproductive investment. Oecologia 149, 535-542. (doi:10.1007/s00442-006-0457-5)
15. Alonso-Alvarez C, Pérez-Rodríguez L, Ferrero ME, de-Blas EG, Casas F, Mougeot F. 2012 Adjustment of female reproductive investment according to male carotenoid-based ornamentation in a gallinaceous bird. Behav. Ecol. Soc. 66, 731-742. (doi:10.1007/s00265-012-1321-8)
16. Horváthová T, Nakagawa S, Uller T. 2012 Strategic female reproductive investment in response to male attractiveness in birds. Proc. R. Soc. B 279, 163-170. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2011.0663)
17. Bart J, Tornes A. 1989 Importance of monogamous male birds in determining reproductive success: evidence for house wrens and a review of maleremoval studies. Behav. Ecol. Soc. 24, 109-116. (doi:10.1007/BF00299642)
18. Lynn SE, Wingfield JC. 2003 Male chestnut-collared longspurs are essential for nestling survival: a removal study. Condor 105, 154-158. (doi:10.1650/0010-5422(2003)105[154:MCCLAE]2.0.CO;2)
19. Møller AP. 1989 Viability costs of male tail ornaments in a swallow. Nature 339, 132-135. (doi:10.1038/339132a0)
20. Arak A, Enquist M. 1993 Hidden preferences and the evolution of signals. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 340, 207-213. (doi:10.1098/rstb.1993.0059)
21. Rodd FH, Hughes KA, Grether GF, Baril CT. 2002 A possible non-sexual origin of mate preference: are male guppies mimicking fruit? Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 269, 475-481. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2001.1891)
22. Seehausen O et al. 2008 Speciation through sensory drive in cichlid fish. Nature 455, 620-623. (doi:10.1038/nature07285)
23. Griggio M, Morosinotto C, Pilastro A. 2009 Nestlings' carotenoid feather ornamentation affects parental allocation strategy and reduces maternal survival. J. Evol. Biol. 22, 2077-2085. (doi:10.1111/j.1420-9101.2009.01823.x)
24. Patricelli GL, Uy JAC, Walsh G, Borgia G. 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. (doi:10.1038/415279a)
25. Wachtmeister CA. 2001 Display in monogamous pairs: a review of empirical data and evolutionary explanations. Anim. Behav. 61, 861-868. (doi:10.1006/anbe.2001.1684)
26. Sachs JL, Mueller UG, Wilcox TP, Bull JJ. 2004 The evolution of cooperation. Q. Rev. Biol. 79, 135-160. (doi:10.1086/383541)
27. Wittenberger JF, Tilson RL. 1980 The evolution of monogamy: hypotheses and evidence. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 11, 197-23. (doi:10.1146/annurev.es.11.110180.001213)
28. Abt K, Konter A. 2009 Survival rates of adult European grebes (Podicepididae). Ardea 97, 313-321. (doi:10.5253/078.097.0307)
29. Chabrzyk G, Coulson JC. 1976 Survival and recruitment in herring gull Largus argentatus. J. Anim. Ecol. 45, 187-203. (doi:10.2307/3774)
30. Royle NJ, Hartley IR, Parker GA. 2002 Sexual conflict reduces offspring fitness in zebra finches. Nature 416, 733-736. (doi:10.1038/416733a)
31. Postma E, Visser J, Van Noordwijk AJ. 2007 Strong artificial selection in the wild results in predicted small evolutionary change. J. Evol. Biol. 20, 1823-1832. (doi:10.1111/j.1420-9101.2007.01379.x)
32. Erickson CJ, Lehrman DS. 1964 Effects of castration of male ring doves upon ovarian activity of females. J. Comp. Physiol. Psych. 58, 164-166. (doi:10.1037/h0038709)
33. Holland B, Rice WR. 1998 Perspective: chase-away sexual selection: antagonistic seduction versus resistance. Evolution 52, 1-7. (doi:10.2307/2410914)
34. Ratikainen II, Kokko H. 2010 Differential allocation and compensation: who deserves the silver spoon? Behav. Ecol. 21, 195-200. (doi:10.1093/beheco/arp168)
35. Lessells CM, McNamara JM. 2012 Sexual conflict over parental investment in repeated bouts: negotiation reduces overall care. Proc. R. Soc. B 279, 1506-1514. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2011.1690)
36. Servedio MR, Lande R. 2006 Population genetic models of male and mutual mate choice. Evolution 60, 674-685.
37. Amundsen T. 2000 Why are female birds ornamented? Trends Ecol. Evol. 15, 149-155. (doi:10.1016/S0169-5347(99)01800-5)
38. Tobias JA, Montgomerie R, Lyon BE. 2012 The evolution of female ornaments and weaponry: social selection, sexual selection and ecological competition. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 367, 2274-2293. (doi:10.1098/rstb.2011.0280)