Stabilizing sexual selection for female ornaments in a dance fly

Journal of Evolutionary Biology

Volumn 25, Issue 7, 2012, Pages 1233-1242

  Wheeler, J ^a   Gwynne, D T ^a   Bussiere L F ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF STIRLING   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Courtship feeding; Empididae; Male choice; Ornamentation; Rhamphomyia; Sex role reversal; Stabilizing selection; Trade offs

Indexed keywords

CANONICAL ANALYSIS; FECUNDITY; FEMALE; FLY; MATE CHOICE; MATING SUCCESS; ORNAMENTATION; SEX REVERSAL; SEX ROLE; SEXUAL SELECTION; SIGNAL; TRADE-OFF;

EID: 85027930903     PISSN: 1010061X     EISSN: 14209101     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1420-9101.2012.02522.x     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Amundsen, T. 2000. Why are female birds ornamented? Trends Ecol. Evol. 15: 149-155.
2. Amundsen, T. & Forsgren, E. 2001. Male mate choice selects for female coloration in a fish. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 98: 13155-13160.
3. Arnold, S.J. & Wade, W.J. 1984a. On the measurement of natural and sexual selection - theory. Evolution 38: 709-719.
4. Arnold, S.J. & Wade, W.J. 1984b. On the measurement of natural and sexual selection - applications. Evolution 38: 720-734.
5. Bisgaard, S. & Ankenman, B. 1996. Standard errors for the eigenvalues in second-order response surface models. Technometrics 38: 238-246.
6. Blanckenhorn, W.U., Reuter, M., Ward, P.I. & Barbour, A.D. 1999. Correcting for sampling bias in quantitative measures of selection when fitness is discrete. Evolution 53: 286-291.
7. Blows, M.W. & Brooks, R. 2003. Measuring non-linear selection. Am. Nat. 162: 238-246.
8. 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.
9. Box, G.E.P. & Draper, N.R. 1987. Empirical Model-building and Response Surfaces. John Wiley and Sons, New York.
10. Bretman, A. & Tregenza, T. 2005. Measuring polyandry in wild populations: a case study using promiscuous crickets. Mol. Ecol. 14: 2169-2179.
11. Brodie, E.D., Moore, A.J. & Janzen, F.J. 1995. Visualizing and quantifying natural selection. Trends Ecol. Evol. 10: 313-318.
12. Bussière, L.F., Gwynne, D.T. & Brooks, R. 2008. Contrasting sexual selection on males and females in a role-reversed swarming dance-fly, Rhamphomyia longicauda Loew (Diptera: Empididae). J. Evol. Biol. 21: 1683-1691.
13. Chenoweth, S.F. & Blows, M.W. 2005. Contrasting mutual sexual selection on homologous signal traits in Drosophila serrata. Am. Nat. 165: 281-289.
14. Chenoweth, S.F., Doughty, P. & Kokko, H. 2006. Can non-directional male mating preferences facilitate honest ornamentation? Ecol. Lett. 9: 179-184.
15. Chenoweth, S.F., Petfield, D., Doughty, P. & Blows, M.W. 2007. Male choice generates stabilizing sexual selection on a female fecundity correlate. J. Evol. Biol. 20: 1745-1750.
16. Clutton-Brock, T. 2007. Sexual selection in males and females. Science 318: 1882-1885.
17. Cumming, J.M. 1994. Sexual selection and the evolution of dance fly mating systems (Diptera: Empididae: Empidinae). Can. Entomol. 126: 907-920.
18. Darwin, C. 1871. The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, USA.
19. Daugeron, C. & Grooterat, P. 2005. Atypical mating behaviour in the empidine dance fly Rhamphomyia (Lundstroemiella) magellensis (Diptera: Empididae: Empidinae). Belg. J. Zool. 135: 97-99.
20. Downes, J.A. 1970. The feeding and mating behaviour of the specialized Empidinae (Diptera: Empididae: Empidinae). Can. Entomol. 126: 907-920.
21. Fitzpatrick, S., Berglund, A. & Rosenqvist, G. 1995. Ornaments or offspring: costs to reproductive success restrict sexual selection processes. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 55: 251-260.
22. Fox, J. & Weisberg, S. 2010. An {R} Companion to Applied Regression, 2nd edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, USA. URL
23. Funk, D.H. & Tallamy, D.W. 2000. Courtship role reversal and deceptive signals in the long-tailed dance fly, Rhamphomyia longicauda. Anim. Behav. 59: 411-421.
24. Griggio, M., Devigili, A., Hoi, H. & Pilastro, A. 2009. Female ornamentation and directional mate preference in the rock sparrow. Behav. Ecol. 20: 1072-1078.
25. Gwynne, D.T. 1981. Sexual difference theory: Mormon crickets show role reversal in mate choice. Science 213: 779-780.
26. Gwynne, D.T. 1991. Sexual competition among females: what causes courtship-role reversal? Trends Ecol. Evol. 6: 118-121.
27. Gwynne, D.T. & Bussière, L.F. 2002. Female mating swarms increase predation risk in a 'role-reversed' dance fly (Diptera: Empididae: Rhamphomyia longicauda Loew). Behaviour 139: 1425-1430.
28. Gwynne, D.T., Bussière, L.F. & Ivy, T.M. 2007. Female ornaments hinder escape from spider webs in a role-reversed swarming dance fly. Anim. Behav. 73: 1077-1082.
29. Heinsohn, R. 2008. The ecological basis of unusual sex roles in reverse dichromatic ecelctus parrots. Anim. Behav. 76: 97-103.
30. Heinsohn, R., Legge, S. & Endler, J.A. 2005. Extreme reversed sexual dichromatism in a bird without sex role reversal. Science 309: 617-619.
31. Hereford, J., Hansen, T.F. & Houle, D. 2004. Comparing strengths of directional selection: how strong is strong? Evolution 58: 2133-2143.
32. Hood, G.M. 2008. PopTools version 3.0.3. URL
33. Hunt, J., Breuker, C.J., Sadowski, J.A. & Moore, A.J. 2009. Male-male competition, female mate choice and their interaction: determining total sexual selection. J. Evol. Biol. 22: 13-26.
34. Jiggins, F.M., Hurst, G.D.D. & Majerus, M.E.N. 2000. Sex-role-distorting Wolbachia causes sex-role reversal in its butterfly host. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 267: 69-73.
35. Kokko, H. & Monaghan, P. 2001. Predicting the direction of sexual selection. Ecol. Lett. 4: 159-165.
36. Kvarnemo, C. & Simmons, L.W. 1999. Variance in female quality, operational sex ratio and male mate choice in a bushcricket. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 45: 245-252.
37. Lande, R. & Arnold, S.J. 1983. The measurement of selection on correlated characters. Evolution 37: 1210-1226.
38. LeBas, N.R., Hockham, L.R. & Ritchie, M.G. 2003. Nonlinear and correlational sexual selection on 'honest' female ornamentation. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 270: 2159-2165.
39. LeBas, N.R., Hockham, L.R. & Ritchie, M.G. 2004. Sexual selection in the gift giving dance fly, Rhamphomyia sulcata, favors small males carrying small gifts. Evolution 58: 1763-1772.
40. Marden, J.H. 1989. Effects of load-lifting constraints on the mating system of a dance fly. Ecology 70: 496-502.
41. Mitchell-Olds, T. & Shaw, R.G. 1987. Regression analysis of natural selection: statistical inference and biological interpretation. Evolution 41: 1149-1161.
42. Newkirk, M.R. 1970. Biology of the longtailed dance fly, Rhamphomyia longicauda (Diptera: Empididae): a new look at swarming. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 63: 1407-1412.
43. Oksanen, J., Läärä, E., Tolonen, K. & Warner, B.G. 2001. Confidence intervals for the optimum in the Gaussian response function. Ecology 82: 1191-1197.
44. Oksanen, J., Kindt, R., Legendre, P., O'Hara, B., Simpson, P. & Solymos, M.H.H. et al. 2009. Community ecology package. R package version 1.16-22/r912. URL
45. Owens, I.P.F. & Thompson, D.B.A. 1994. Sex differences, sex ratios and sex roles. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 258: 93-99.
46. Parker, G.A. 1983. Mate quality and mating decisions. In: Mate Choice (P. Bateson, ed.), pp. 141-166. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
47. Phillips, P.C. & Arnold, S.J. 1989. Visualizing multivariate selection. Evolution 43: 1209-1222.
48. Preston-Mafham, K.G. 1999. Courtship and mating in Empis (Xanthempis) trigramma Meig., E. tessellata F. and E. (Polyblepharis) opaca F. (Diptera: Empididae) and the possible implications of 'cheating' behaviour. J. Zool. (Lond.) 247: 239-246.
49. R Development Core Team. 2010. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0, URL
50. Rasband, W.S. 2008. ImageJ. U. S. National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA. URL
51. Reynolds, R.J., Childers, D.K. & Pajewski, N.M. 2010. The distribution and hypothesis testing of eigenvalues from the canonical analysis of the gamma matrix of quadratic and correlational selection gradients. Evolution 64: 1076-1085.
52. Robson, L.J. & Gwynne, D.T. 2010. Measuring sexual selection on females in sex-role-reversed Mormon crickets (Anabrus simplex, Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae). J. Evol. Biol. 23: 1528-1537.
53. Rundle, H.D. & Chenoweth, S.F. 2010. Stronger convex (stabilizing) selection on homologous sexual display traits in females than in males: a multipopulation comparison in Drosophila serrata. Evolution 65: 893-899.
54. Sadowski, J.A., Moore, A.J. & Brodie, E.D. 1999. The evolution of empty nuptial gifts in a dance fly, Empis snoddyi (Diptera: Empididae): bigger isn't always better. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 45: 161-166.
55. Saeki, Y., Kruse, K.C. & Switzer, P.V. 2005. Physiological costs of mate guarding in the Japanese beetle (Popillia japonica Newman). Ethology 111: 863-877.
56. Simmons, L.W. 1990. Nuptial feeding in tettigoniids: male costs and the rates of fecundity increase. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 27: 43-47.
57. Stinchcombe, J.R., Agrawal, A.F., Hohenlohe, P., Arnold, S.J. & Blows, M.W. 2008. Estimating nonlinear selection gradients using quadratic regression coefficients: double or nothing? Evolution 62: 2435-2440.
58. Svensson, B.G. 1997. Swarming behavior, sexual dimorphism, and female reproductive status in the sex role-reversed dance fly species Rhamphomyia marginata. J. Insect Behav. 10: 783-804.
59. Svensson, B.G. & Petersson, E. 1987. Sex-role reversed courtship behavior, sexual dimorphism and nuptial gifts in the dance fly Empis borealis (L.). Ann. Zool. Fenn. 24: 323-334.
60. Svensson, B.G. & Petersson, E. 1988. Non-random mating in the dance fly Empis borealis: the importance of male mate choice. Ethology 79: 307-316.
61. Trivers, R.L. 1972. Parental investment and sexual selection. In: Sexual Selection and the Descent of Man 1871-1971 (B. Campbell, ed.), pp. 136-179. Aldine Publishing Co, Chicago.
62. Wheeler, J. 2008. Sexual Selection and Female Ornamentation in a Role-reversed Dance Fly. M.Sc. thesis. University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
63. Zuur, A.F., Ieno, E.N. & Elphick, C.S. 2009. A protocol for data exploration to avoid common statistical problems. Methods Ecol. Evol. 1: 3-14.