▪ Abstract  To assess the frequency and importance of reinforcement in nature we must begin by looking for its signature in the most likely places. Theoretical studies can pinpoint conditions that favor and inhibit reinforcement, and empirical studies can identify both how often these conditions occur and whether reinforcement results. We examine how well these tools have addressed these questions by searching for gaps and mismatches in theoretical and empirical studies of reinforcement. We concentrate on five areas: (a) a broad assessment of selection against interspecific mating, (b) the mode and genetic basis of nonrandom mating, (c) the geography of speciation, (d) divergent selection on mating cues, (e) and the genetics of reproductive isolation. We conclude that reinforcement has probably not been looked for where it is most likely to occur. We pinpoint however, many further areas of study that may ultimately provide a strong assessment of the importance of reinforcement in speciation. “The grossest blunder in sexual preference, which we can conceive of an animal making, would be to mate with a species different from its own and with which the hybrids are either infertile or, through the mixture of instincts and other attributes appropriate to different courses of life, at so serious a disadvantage as to leave no descendants.”           — Fisher, 1930 pp. 130

No abstract

No abstract

The large body of theory on speciation with gene flow has brought to light fundamental differences in the effects of two types of mating rules on speciation: preference/trait rules, in which divergence in both (female) preferences and (male) mating traits is necessary for assortment, and matching rules, in which individuals mate with like individuals on the basis of the presence of traits or alleles that they have in common. These rules can emerge from a variety of behavioral or other mechanisms in ways that are not always obvious. We discuss the theoretical properties of both types of rules and explain why speciation is generally thought to be more likely under matching rather than preference/trait rules. We furthermore discuss whether specific assortative mating mechanisms fall under a preference/trait or matching rule, present empirical evidence for these mechanisms, and propose empirical tests that could distinguish between them. The synthesis of the theoretical literature on these assortative mating rules with empirical studies of the mechanisms by which they act can provide important insights into the occurrence of speciation with gene flow. Finally, by providing a clear framework we hope to inspire greater alignment in the ways that both theoreticians and empiricists study mating rules and how these rules affect speciation through maintaining or eroding barriers to gene flow among closely related species or populations.