Sexual conflict over the indirect benefits of mate choice may arise when traits in one sex limit the ability of the other sex to freely choose mates but when these coercive traits are not necessarily directly harmful (i.e. forced fertilization per se). Although we might hypothesize that females can evolve resistance in order to retain the indirect, genetic benefits (reflected in offspring attractiveness) of mating with attractive males, up to now it has been difficult to evaluate potential underlying mechanisms. Traditional theoretical approaches do not usually conceptually distinguish between female preference for male mating display and female resistance to forced fertilization, yet sexual conflict over indirect benefits implies the simultaneous action of all of these traits. Here, we present an integrative theoretical framework that draws together concepts from both sexual selection and sexual conflict traditions, allowing for the simultaneous coevolution of displays and preferences, and of coercion and resistance. We demonstrate that it is possible for resistance to coercion to evolve in the absence of direct costs of mating to preserve the indirect benefits of mate choice. We find that resistance traits that improve the efficacy of female mating preference can evolve as long as females are able to attain some indirect benefits of mating with attractive males, even when both attractive and unattractive males can coerce. These results reveal new evolutionary outcomes that were not predicted by prior theories of indirect benefits or sexual conflict.
Models of sexual conflict over mating, including conflict over indirect benefits of mate choice, have generally presumed that female resistance to male coercion must involve direct confrontation, which can lead to sexually antagonistic coevolutionary arms-races. We built a quantitative model examining the largely ignored possibility that females may evolve new, additional mate preferences for new male traits that undermine male capacity to coerce. Thus, females may “remodel” the coercive capacity of the male phenotype in order to enhance their own sexual autonomy—a novel alternative mechanism by which females may avoid arms-races. We demonstrate that evolutionary “remodeling” is possible, in spite of costs to males, because females that prefer males with protective, autonomy-enhancing traits (traits correlated with lower coercion effectiveness) are likelier to gain indirect benefits of having attractive mates. Our analysis reveals new possibilities for the evolution of systems of sexual conflict over indirect benefits, showing that autonomy-enhancing male traits can act as a “public good,” benefiting all females regardless of mating preferences, leading to oscillatory dynamics; and that preferences for more protective male traits will often be favored relative to preferences for less protective traits, potentially leading to an evolutionary “snowball” of expanding sexual autonomy.
A catalyst meeting on sexual selection studies was held in July 2013 at the facilities of the National Evolutionary Synthesis Center (NESCent) in Durham, NC. This article by a subcommittee of the participants foregrounds some of the topics discussed at the meeting. Topics mentioned here include the relevance of heritability estimates to assessing the presence of sexual selection, whether sexual selection is distinct from natural selection, and the utility of distinguishing sexual selection from fecundity selection. A possible definition of sexual selection is offered based on a distinction between sexual selection as a frequency-dependent process and fecundity selection as a density-dependent process. Another topic highlighted is a deep disagreement among participants in the reality of good-genes, sexy-sons, and run-away processes. Finally, the status of conflict in political-economic theory is contrasted with the status accorded to conflict in evolutionary behavioral theory, and the professional responsibility of sexual-selection workers to consider the ethical dimension of their research is underscored.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.