Sexual Selection: Is Anything Left?

History, Philosophy and Theory of the Life Sciences

Volumn 9, Issue , 2015, Pages 85-102

  Roughgarden, Joan ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII   (United States)

Author keywords

Anisogamy; Cooperation; Family firm; Mutual direct benefit; Nash Bargaining Solution; Pleasure; Sexual selection; Social infrastructure selection; Social selection; Teams

Indexed keywords

EID: 85009835344     PISSN: 22111948     EISSN: 22111956     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/978-94-017-9585-2_5     Document Type: Chapter

References (72)

1. Ah-King M (2011) Female sexual selection in light of the Darwin-Bateman paradigm. Behav Ecol. doi:10.1093/beheco/arr109
2. Akçay E (2012) Incentives in the family II: Behavioral dynamics and the evolution of non-costly signaling. J theor Biol 294:9–18
3. Akçay E, Roughgarden J (2007) Extra-pair paternity in birds: review of the genetic benefits. Evol Ecol Res 9:855–868
4. Alexander RD (1974) The evolution of social behaviour. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 5:325–383.
5. Amundsen T, Forsgren E, Hansen L (1997) On the function of female ornaments: male bluethroats prefer colourful females. Proc R Soc Lond B 264:1579–1586
6. Amundsen T (2000) Why are female birds ornamented? Trends. Ecol Evol 4:149–155
7. Andersson M (1994) Sexual Selection. Princeton University, Princeton
8. Bateman AJ (1948) Intra-sexual selection in Drosophila. Heredity 2(3):349–368
9. Birkhead TR (2000) Promiscuity: an evolutionary history of sperm competition. Harvard University, Cambridge
10. Bonduriansky R (2001) The evolution of male mate choice in insects: a synthesis of ideas and evidence. Biol Rev 76:305–339
11. Coyne J (2004) “Charm schools” (Review of Evolution’s Rainbow by J. Roughgarden). Times Literary Supplement. 30 July 2004.
12. Clutton-Brock T (2009) Sexual selection in females. Anim Behav 77(1):3–11
13. Dakin R, Montgomerie R (2011) Peahens prefer peacocks displaying more eyespots, but rarely. Anim Behav 82:21–28
14. Darwin C (1871) The descent of man and selection in relation to sex. Volumes I. and II. John Murray, London
15. Darwin C (1874) The descent of man. Cromwell, New York
16. Dawkins R (1976) The selfish gene. Oxford Univ., Oxford
17. Dewsbury D (2005) The Darwin-Bateman paradigm in historical context. Integr Comp Biol 45:831–837
18. Emlen S, Oring LW (1977) Ecology, sexual selection, and the evolution of mating systems. Science 197:215–223
19. Fisher RA (1915) The evolution of sexual preference. Eugenics Rev 7:184–191
20. Fisher RA (1930) The genetical theory of natural selection. Clarendon, Oxford
21. Fosgren E, Amundsen T, Borg AA, Bjelvenmark J (2004). Unusually dynamic sex roles in a fish. Nature 429:551–554
22. Godfray HCJ (1991) Signaling of need by offspring to their parents. Nature 352:328–330.
23. Godfray H, Johnstone R (2000) Begging and bleating: the evolution of parent-offspring signalling. Phil Trans R Soc Lond B 355:1581–1591
24. Gould S, Lewontin R (1979) The spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian paradigm: a critique of the adaptationist programme. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 205(1161):581–598
25. Gowaty P (2011) What is sexual selection and the short herstory of female trait variation. Behav Ecol. doi:10.1093/beheco/arr113
26. Gowaty P, Kim Y, Anderson W (2012) No evidence of sexual selection in a repetition of Bateman’s classic study of Drosophila melanogaster. Proc Nat Acad Sci U S A 109:11740–11745. www. pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1207851109
27. Grafen A (1990) Biological signals as handicaps. J Theor Biol 144:517–546
28. Gwynne DT, Simmons LW (1990) Experimental reversal of courtship roles in an insect. Nature 346:172–174
29. Hadfield JD, Burgess MD, Lord A, Phillimore AB, Clegg SM, Owens IPF (2006) Direct versus indirect sexual selection: genetic basis of colour, size and recruitment in a wild bird. Proc R Soc B 273:1347–1353
30. Hale M, Verduijn M, Møller A, Wolff K, Petrie M (2009) Is the peacock's train an honest signal of genetic quality at the major histocompatibility complex? J Evol Biol 22:1284–1294
31. Harcourt AH, Harvey PH, Larson SG, Short RV (1981) Testis weight, body weight and breeding system in primates. Nature 293:55–57
32. Harris WE, McKane AJ, Wolf JB (2008) The maintenance of heritable variation through social competition. Evolution Int J org Evolution 62:337–347
33. Johnstone R, Reynolds J, Deutsch J (1996) Mutual mate choice and sex differences in choosiness. Evolution 50:1382–1391
34. Kirkpatrick M (1982) Sexual selection and the evolution of female choice. Evolution Int J org Evolution 82:1–12
35. Kotiaho JS, LeBas NR, Puurtinen M, Tomkins JL (2008) On the resolution of the lek paradox. Trends Ecol Evol 23:1–3
36. Kraaijeveld K, Kraaijeveld-Smit F, Komdeur J (2007) The evolution of mutual ornamentation. Anim Behav 74:657–677
37. Lande R (1981) Models of speciation by sexual selection on polygenic traits. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 78:3721–3725
38. Macnair MR, Parker GA (1978) Models of parent-offspring conflict. II. Promiscuity. Anim Behav 26:111–122
39. Macnair MR, Parker GA (1979) Models of parent-offspring conflict. III. Intra-brood conflict. Anim Behav 27:1202–1209
40. Maynard Smith J (1982) Evolution and the theory of games. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
41. Mayr E (1963) Animal species and evolution. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
42. Millstein R (2011) Sex and sensibility: The role of social selection (book symposium on Joan Roughgarden’s The genial gene). Metascience 20:258–264
43. Milam E (2010) Looking for a few good males: female choice in evolutionary biology. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore
44. Miller CW, Moore AJ (2007) A potential resolution to the lek paradox through indirect genetic effects. Proc R Soc B 274:1279–1286
45. Parker G, Baker R, Smith V (1972) The origin and evolution of gamete dimorphism and the malefemale phenomenon. J Theor Biol 36:529–553
46. Parker G, Macnair M (1978) Models of parent-offspring conflict. I. Monogamy. Anim Behav 26:97–110
47. Parker G, Macnair M (1979) Models of parent-offspring conflict. IV. Suppression: evolutionary retaliation by the parent. Anim Behav 27:1210–1235
48. Pizzari T, Foster KR (2008) Sperm sociality: cooperation, altruism, and spite. PLoS Biol 6:e130
49. Prum RO (2010) The Lande-Kirkpatrick mechanism is the null model of evolution by intersexual selection: implications for meaning, honesty, and design in intersexual signals. Evolution 64:3085–3100
50. 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.
51. Rosvall K (2011) Intrasexual competition in females: evidence for sexual selection? Behavioral Ecology. doi:10.1093/beheco/arr106
52. Roughgarden J (2004) Evolution’s rainbow: diversity, gender and sexuality in nature and people. University of California Press, Berkeley CA
53. Roughgarden J (2005) The myth of sexual selection. Calif Wild 53:18–23
54. Roughgarden J (2007) Challenging Darwin's theory of sexual selection. Daedalus 136:1–14
55. Roughgarden J (2009) The Genial Gene: Deconstructing Darwinian Selfishness. University of California, Berkeley
56. Roughgarden J (2012a) The social selection alternative to sexual selection. Phil Trans Roy Soc B doi:10.1098/rstb.2011.0282
57. Roughgarden J (2012b) Teamwork, pleasure, and bargaining in animal social behavior. J Evol Biol doi:10.1111/j.1420-9101.2012.02505.x
58. Roughgarden J et al (2013) Sexual Selection Studies: Progress, Challenges, and Future Directions. Final Report from a NESCent Catalyst Meeting. Durham NC, July 15–17, 2013. Revision 1.1, December 11, 2013
59. Roughgarden J, Oishi M, Akçay E (2006) Reproductive social behavior: cooperative games to replace sexual selection. Science 311:965–969
60. Roughgarden J, Akçay E (2010) Do we need a sexual selection 2.0? Anim Behav 79:E1–E4
61. Roughgarden J, Iyer P (2011) Contact, not conflict, causes the evolution of anisogamy. In: Togashi T, Cox P (eds) The evolution of anisogamy: a fundamental phenomenon underlying sexual selection. Cambridge UK, Cambridge University Press, pp 96–110
62. Roughgarden J, Song Z (2014) Incentives in the family I: The family firm, an evolutionary/economic theory for parent-offspring relations. In: Narvaez D, Valentino K, Fuentes A, McKenna J, Gray P Ancestral landscapes in human evolution: culture, childrearing and social wellbeing. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 221–240
63. Shuker D (2010) Sexual selection: endless forms or tangled bank? Anim Behav 79:E11–E17
64. Simmons LW (1992) Quantification of role reversal in relative parental investment in a bush cricket. Nature 358:61–63
65. Snyder B, Gowaty, PA (2007) A reappraisal of Bateman's classic study of intrasexual selection. Evolution Int J org Evolution 61:2457–2468
66. Stockley P, Bro-Jørgensen J (2011) Female competition and its evolutionary consequences in mammals. Biol Rev 86:341–366
67. Takahashi M, Arita H, Hiraiwa-Hasegawa M, Hasegawa T (2008) Peahens do not prefer peacocks with more elaborate trains. Anim Behav 75:1209–1219
68. Tang-Martinez Z, Ryder TB (2005) The problem with paradigms: Bateman's worldview as a case study. Integr Comp Biol 45:821–830
69. Tickell WLN (2000) Albatrosses. Yale University Press, New Haven Conn
70. Trivers RL (1972) Parental investment and sexual selection. In: Campbell B (ed) Sexual selection and the descent of man. Aldine Publishing, Chicago, pp 136–179
71. Wallace AR (1871) Darwin’s ‘The descent of man and selection in relation to sex’. The Acad 1871:177
72. West-Eberhard MJ (1983) Sexual selection, social competition and speciation. Quart Rev Biol 58:155–183