Perspective: Chase‐away Sexual Selection: Antagonistic Seduction Versus Resistance

Abstract

A model of sexual selection that leads to the evolution of exaggerated male display characters that is based on antagonistic coevolution between the sexes is described. The model is motivated by three lines of research: intersexual conflict with respect to mating, sensory exploitation, and the evolution of female resistance, as opposed to preference, for male display traits. The model generates unique predictions that permit its operation to be distinguished from other established models of sexual selection. One striking prediction is that females will frequently win the coevolutionary arms race with males, leaving them encumbered with costly ornaments that have little value except that their absence understimulates females. Examples from the literature suggest that the model may have broad application in nature. The chase-away model is a special case of the more general phenomenon of Interlocus Contest Evolution (ICE).

The role of complex cues in social and reproductive plasticity

“…For example, there can be a selective advantage to males conveying deceptive cues to females regarding their individual quality, while females are selected to detect honest information (Holland and Rice 1998). As females evolve resistance to one deceptive male trait, males may evolve new cues to manipulate female perception of quality, resulting in multicomponent mating displays.…”

Coevolution of Male and Female Genital Morphology in Waterfowl

“…Genital morphologies that give a sexual advantage to one sex at the expense of the other could lead to coevolution between the sexes and an evolutionary arms race in copulation behaviour, morphology, or physiology [9]–[11]. If males have genital traits that allow them to manipulate females and bias paternity, then coevolved modifications in female genital anatomy would allow females to regain some control over copulation and/or fertilization success [12].…”

Female Sexual Polymorphism and Fecundity Consequences of Male Mating Harassment in the Wild

“…Female fitness costs from mating conflicts with males are expected to drive sexually antagonistic coevolution [1] causing males and females to coevolve rapidly in a “chase-away” process [2]. Laboratory studies on model organisms such as Drosophila have revealed genetic and phenotypic variation in female response towards male mating attempts [3]–[7] and demonstrated sexually antagonistic co-evolution driven by mating costs on female fitness [3], [5], [8], [9].…”

“…Rapid divergence of populations with differing levels of sexual conflict has been demonstrated in laboratory experiments on both fruit flies ( Drosophila melanogaster )[3] and dung flies ( Sepsis cynipsea )[14]. But a recent theoretical model found that sexually antagonistic mating interactions can lead to females forming different genetic clusters effectively preventing males from participating in a traditional coevolutionary chase away [2], with males instead become trapped between the clusters in a “buridan's ass” regime [11] (classical paradox; an ass placed between two equal piles of hay will starve as it will be unable to make any rational decision to start eating one rather than the other). Once such female morphs have been formed, ongoing and chronic sexual conflict should maintain the morphs through frequency-dependent selection favouring the rarer morphs [15], [16].…”