Evolution Genetics Population
Genetics HLA MHC Inf &
Imm Genetic
Epidemiology Epidemiology Glossary Homepage
SEXUAL SELECTION
M.Tevfik Dorak, M.D., Ph.D.
Current debate on Cooperative Games and Sexual
Selection (PubMed - Science)
Sexual selection is selection
for characters that enhance mating success. Darwin was impressed by the fact
that qualities of sexual attractiveness were often the reverse of qualities
leading to individual survival. He thought that gaining a higher chance to win
mates was worth the risk conferred by such characters. Bright colours, long
tails, plumes, antlers and horns threaten the survival of the animal but they
also give them an advantage in fighting other males or attracting females. To
Darwin, sexually selected characters were of no use other than being attractive
to the females. He described sexual selection as selection in relation to sex.
Wallace, however, thought that all those characters were more than ornaments
with some utilitarian quality which females benefited for choosing. In his
view, the ornamentations are used to advertise genuine quality as only the
healthiest males can afford doing so; mating with them will generate more and
healthier offspring.
Sexual selection leads to
the evolution of characters that are apparently maladaptive. In view of the
modern view of (inclusive) fitness, however, natural selection and sexual
selection are not distinct and opposing processes. Superficially, sexual
selection favours elaborate sexually dimorphic characters and natural selection
opposes it because of their interference with survival. When fitness is seen as
reproductive success rather than simply survival, sexual selection promotes
morphological characters that would enhance reproductive success, thus, this is
no different from what natural selection does. As long as the sexually selected
characters do not prevent the individual attaining breeding age, sexual
selection increases reproductive success of the individual whatever the overall
survival cost is.
Sexual selection causes
sexual dimorphism since it usually concerns males. This could lead to
misidentification of individual specimens, particularly fossils. Natural
selection in relation to sex may cause very rapid evolutionary change (runaway
selection; see below). It may even lead to the formation of new species. It is
also possible that sexual selection could have caused extinction of some
species. The logic behind the fact that sexual selection mainly concerns males
is simple. Males produce an enormous number of small sperms without investing
too much energy, whereas, females produce a few large and nutritious eggs and
they are very costly to them. If a male mates with several females, he
increases the number of his progeny, but for females it makes no difference. A
female gains only a little from having a large number of copulations with
different males. Therefore, males in general are promiscuous but females are
choosy because they want their few progeny to be of highest possible quality.
There is also another reason. In species where females invest more in
offspring, females will be the choosier sex. Females, then, want to increase
the quality of their progeny by mating with particular males rather than
others. All other things being equal, males are under strong selection to mate
with as many females as possible. The selection forces on females act to be
selective in terms of which males father their progeny. In summary, eggs
represent a limited resource for which males must compete. There is usually a
trade-off between mating behaviour and parental care.
Competition among males
to obtain mates caused the evolution of intrasexual and intersexual selection.
Pre-copulatory intrasexual selection (male-male competition) works through male
aggression to claim the disputed females and intersexual selection (female
choice) promoted the development of sexually attractive conspicuous characters
but no fighting. In some mating systems male aggression and female choice for
male characters are both involved (post-copulatory counterparts of these
mechanisms are sperm competition and cryptic female choice, see below).
Elephant seals are polygamous; pregnant females arrive on the breeding ground
and gather together, giving birth in September; within three weeks they are
ready for mating again. In October, a single male, which can be three times
larger than the female, will claim a harem of as many as a hundred females, and
will fight any other male that approaches his territory, proclaiming his
ownership with a loud cry. Only fully mature males have the size and strength
to keep such a harem. When a male approaches a female, the female cries and
starts a fight among males to be copulated by the strongest of them (Le Boeuf BJ, 1972; Cox & Le Boeuf, Am Nat
1977;111(978):317-35). This is an example of sexual selection enticed by the
females. A female elephant uses the same tactic to make sure she is mating with
the strongest male in the group. Wood frogs (Rana
sylvatica) exhibit explosive, synchronous breeding on a spring
night. They gather in thousands at ponds where males compete intensively for
females and even attempt to dislodge the amplexing male. Females also show
choosiness by physically dislodging weakly amplexing males from their backs,
therefore showing their preference for larger males. Red deer is another
polygamous species in which a few dominant males mate with most of the females.
It has to be noted that the harem masters among elephant seals and red deer
have very much shorter reproductive lifespans than the females they defend. In
elks, during rutting, the larger males are preferred by females through the
correlation between the body size and pitch of the voice (the larger the body,
the lower the pitch).
Sexual selection in
species where females are heterogametic (e.g., having two different sex
chromosomes 'ZW' such as birds, butterflies and moths) occurs mainly by the
elaboration of ornate male secondary sexual characteristics, whereas in species
where females are homogametic (e.g., having two copies of the same sex
chromosome 'XX' such as mammals) sexual selection results predominantly in
inter-male rivalry and the evolution of traits such as horns, antlers and large
body size (all of which are testosterone-dependent). Another important factor
determining the pressure of sexual selection is that males in monogamous
species are subject to weaker sexual selection than males in polygynous
species.
Since for biological
reasons females are the choosy sex, it would be beneficial for them if there
were some physical indicators of a quality of the genes of a male. Such
externally visible clues to good genes would help them to make their choice.
One such character would be the age of male since old age itself is a direct
marker for survival ability. The selection of males with larger song repertoire
by some birds may be due to the correlation of song repertoire with age. Other
physical features used for selection by females may indeed be markers for male
quality. A female Satin Bower Bird is, for example, attracted to a bower built
by a male and is rich in rare blue objects. The males constantly fight and raid
each other's bowers, so that a well-kept bower indicates the owner's
superiority (Borgia G, 1985; see also Borgia
Lab website).
There are three main
theories currently being considered in the explanation of female choice
[another grouping consists of the Fisherian run-away, viability indicator,
sensory exploitation and antagonistic seduction models (Jennions & Petrie, 2000)]:
1. Run-away Selection Theory (RA Fisher, 1958): According to Fisher, if a majority of females prefer a particular kind of male, other females would be favoured if they mate with the same kind of males because their sons will be attractive to many females. Every individual will tend to inherit its mother’s genes for preferring its father, and its father’s genes for the qualities preferred. These two (groups of) genes will then segregate together and under certain circumstances, due to positive feedback, may lead to runaway selection of more and more exaggeration of the quality preferred. This would continue until the disadvantage, in terms of male survival, exceeds the reproductive advantage for males. Eventually, all the males in the population will end up with a tail length at the optimum point. When all males come to have the same trait, there would be no genetic advantage to a female in choosing one rather than the other. Because of this major problem with this theory, more elaborate forms of it have been developed.
2. 'Good Genes' Theories
a) Strategic
Choice Handicap Theory (Zahavi A, J Theor Biol 1975 & 1977): This theory tries to explain the evolution
of conspicuous characters from a different point of view. It suggests that the
physical characters that are operational in sexual selection have evolved as
handicaps to mark the stronger males who have survived despite the handicaps
they bear. There are two kinds of handicaps: conditional or strategic choice
handicaps reducing fitness (such as long tail) and revealing handicaps which
confer no reduction in fitness (such as the bright colouring). The assumption
that the tails of the peacock, birds of paradise and other birds, and the
antlers of deer are 'handicaps' that these traits (when inherited by the
offspring) will penalize them is not very convincing. The terms
'advertisements' or 'status symbols' may describe these traits better.
b) Revealing
Signal Theory (Hamilton & Zuk, 1982): This theory proposes that only males
resistant to parasites would be able to display conspicuous features -not
necessarily costly to them- to attract females. Thus, the ornaments (such as
long tails, inflated throat poaches or bright plumage) simply reveal the state
of health without damaging it so they constitute revealing handicaps. Female
choice for males with the best-developed sexual characters would result in
offspring that are likely to inherit genetically-determined resistance to
parasites from their father. This theory is in line with Wallace’s
opinion about sexually selected characters and offers a possible solution to
two serious problems in the theory of sexual selection: (1) choosing such a
male is adaptive for females, (2) heritable genetic variation in male
characters may be maintained despite the strong directional selection on these
characters which should theoretically be short-lived. Since most parasites have
shorter generation times than their hosts, the host has to adapt to new
varieties constantly which would keep the selection going. Perhaps, as Wallace
advocated, ornamentations are advertising genuine quality. The essence of the
good genes theory is that an ornament can be sustained only by genuinely
healthy males in good condition. Female sticklebacks, for example, use male
coloration in mate choice and avoid parasitized males (Milinski & Bakker,
1990). A bright ruddy complexion in Uakari Monkeys signals good health and
resistance to monkey malaria; pale faced ones are sickly and have no sex
appeal. It has been shown that the offspring of peacocks with more elaborate
trains enjoy improved growth and survival (Petrie M, 1994). Similarly, in male
great tits (Parus major), heritable variation in a plumage is an indicator of
viability (Norris K, 1993).
Recently, a set of data
supporting the Hamilton & Zuk model was presented from the Molecular Population Biology
Laboratory of Lund University (see also Dustin Penn's Work). Pheasants are
polygynous and cocks defend a harem with several hens. There is a marked
difference in plumage between the males and only the hen cares for the chicks.
Spurs are one of the most variable ornaments of male pheasants and they found
that males with longer spurs survived better than short spurred ones and this
was not a by-product of male-male competition. This observation indicates that
spur length reflects male quality and that females can use this trait to choose
among potential fathers and pick up only those with good genetic traits to mate
with in order to increase the quality of their young. They found that offspring
from long spurred males had an increased survival. In a sample of 110 male
pheasants, there was a significant difference in spur length between different
MHC genotypes. The MHC
exists in all vertebrate animals and is the genetic complex involved in
immunocompetence and disease resistance. They also found fewer than expected
MHC homozygous individuals and different survival of different MHC genotypes
(von Schantz T et al, 1989,
1994, 1996).
These are the first data that directly support the "good genes"
hypothesis predicting that females discriminate among males on the basis of
secondary sexual characters in order to pass on genes for disease resistance
which will improve fitness in their offspring. The same Laboratory also reported
that male song repertoire in great reed warblers correlates with post-fledging
survival of offspring and, females choose (older) males with large song
repertoires, resulting in extra-pair fertilizations with neighbouring males
(Hasselquist D et al, 1996; see
also Why Do Birds Sing?).
It is well established
that in vertebrates testosterone has an immunosuppressive effect, and thus
males have greater susceptibility to infections (including parasitic ones).
Folstad & Karter (1992) suggested that males exhibiting well-developed
secondary sexual ornaments, such as the comb on a rooster or antlers on a deer,
might possess genes that offset the immunosuppression that often accompanies
the production of testosterone-dependent ornaments. It follows that only males
with immune systems robust enough to withstand the compromise associated with
high levels of testosterone can maintain elaborate secondary sex characters.
Females choosing to mate with such males then have offspring that inherit not
only the attractiveness of their father, but his ability to resist pathogens
while maintaining elaborate ornaments. This hypothesis also suggests that the
ornaments are markers of good genes. Folstad and Karter refer to the ornament
as an immunocompetence handicap. For example, male red jungle fowl (Gallus
gallus) with larger combs have higher testosterone levels but fewer lymphocytes
(less immunocompetent) than less-ornamented individuals, suggesting that maintenance
of the ornament causes a compromise in immunocompetence (Zuk M et al. 1995). In
this model, the good genes are proposed to be immune response genes and the
same MHC genes fit into this model well. Recently, Dicthkoff et al (2001)
have provided evidence for the role of the MHC in the development of antlers in
white-tailed deer. They showed correlations between a heterozygous MHC genotype
and antler development, body mass and testosterone levels. Thus, the MHC may be
involved in sexual selection as the genetic origin of the 'good genes'
affecting the development of secondary sexual characters and the quality of the
immune response both in intra and intersexual competition.
3. Sensory Bias or Passive Attraction Theory (Parker
GA, 1982): This is the simplest and a very convincing theory. It suggests that
the sexually selected characters (such as loud sounds, bright plumage, long tails)
are simply more conspicuous and more likely to attract the attention of a
female from a distance than less intense signals. The evolution of such
signals, therefore, may have nothing to do with handicaps or male quality. They
may just be the result of selection on males to be noticed by females. Female
Natterjack toads, for example, simply choose the louder male. This idea is
consistent with a well-known phenomenon by ethologists that many animals
respond to supernormal stimuli: bigger, louder, and faster. Females who choose
males with conspicuous, easy to recognize signals denoting which species they
belong to, mate successfully with little cost. This easy choice behaviour would
be favoured, even if the female gains no additional advantage through the
attractiveness of her sons (Fisher's theory) or genetically high quality
children of both sexes (good genes theories). Such easy choice signals of males
may simply be enabling females to find a mate with minimal cost.
The overall conclusion
is that although sexual selection is widely referred to in the literature as if
it were a process distinct from natural selection, it should be regarded -as
Darwin did- as a form of natural selection. Sexual selection is not some extra
force in opposition to natural selection. It is about selection in relation to
sex which is governed by the same processes involved in the evolution of
characters that are not related to sex. It is basically natural selection
acting differently on the two sexes.
The less appreciated
form of sexual selection that has gained popularity lately is the cryptic female choice. This is a
postcopulatory process of sperm selection probably for the genetically most
divergent ones (another inbreeding avoidance mechanism). The selection for
sperm may start as early as in the vagina, may involve the process called sperm
capacitation in the uterus and the long journey of the sperm along the
reproductive tract. Finally, the ovum itself may have mechanisms to distinguish
between sperms. The overall effect is selective fertilization. This is
particularly important in animals where forced copulations (as in yellow dung
fly, reptiles and ducks) or extra-matings (as in zebra finch, mice) take place.
Cryptic female choice forms the post-copulatory continuation of female mate
choice whereas sperm competition is the continuation of male-to-male
competition. Cryptic female choice consists of many other mechanisms including
selective abortion. Pre-copulatory sexual selection results in non-random
mating and post-copulatory selection in selective
fertilization/implantation/abortion. Most interestingly, similar mechanisms
also exist in plants: pollen competition/selection, differential pollen tube
growth, selective fertilization, selective fruit and seed abortion.
The above-mentioned
(pre-copulatory) female enticed sexual selection in seals has its correspondent
in post-copulatory phase of selection. Female feral fowl prefer dominant males
but if they are sexually coerced by subordinate males and their manipulation of
dominant males fails, they differentially eject the sperm from subdominant
males (Pizzari & Birkhead, 2000). This example shows
that sexual selection continues after copulation and post-copulatory mechanisms
exist to fix the mistakes made in earlier phases. In fact, pre-copulatory
mechanisms may not even exist for several reasons (males cannot reliably signal
their quality or females cannot detect signals). In these situations, females
are only left with the post-copulatory mechanisms they can use. By mating
polyandrously, sexual selection occurs in copula (Jennions & Petrie, 2000). Post-copulatory
mechanisms of female choice may be more successful at detecting genetic
compatibility because males cannot disguise their identity as easily (Zeh & Zeh, 1997; Newcomer et al, 1999). Genetic compatibility is
detected via signals on sperm, and sperm-soma or egg-sperm interactions but
avoidance of genetic incompatibility is not the only benefit of post-copulatory
sexual selection (Evans & Magurran, 2000).
Sexual selection and
speciation: Sexual selection affects the process of
mating and the slightest change to the process of mating, if it prevents interbreeding,
means a new species exists (via reproductive isolation mechanisms).
Evidence for sexual
selection: Preference of
prominently collared males of the Guppy (Poecilia reticulata) by females
correlates with the presence of more collared male fish (Houde & Endler,
1990). The number of colourful fish is high when there is not much predation
(sexual selection), but low when there are predators in the habitat (natural
selection). Colour patterns of natural populations of guppies are, therefore, a
compromise between sexual selection and predation avoidance. They are
relatively more conspicuous to guppies at the times and places of courtship and
relatively less conspicuous at the times and places of maximum predator risk
(Endler JA 1991).
The great crested newt
provides an example of a correlation between a sexually selected character and
general condition. Newts with higher crests during breeding time are in better
conditions. Therefore, selection of males in terms of their crest height is
selection for healthy ones.
The male fiddler crab
E.albus has one greatly enlarged claw with which he displays to females; the
female fiddler crabs mate preferentially with males with larger claws. In this
case this exaggerated male character is positively advantageous in survival
terms as it provides enhanced protection against predation by birds.
In seaweed flies, the
male character preferred by females is the adult size. The adult size has large
additive genetic variance in males, but not in females. The benefit of this
selection is that virtually all the variance in male size is attributable to a
chromosomal inversion system which is also a major determinant of larval
viability, and male size is a reliable indicator of offspring survival for
females (Wilcockson RW et al, 1995).
Courtship behaviour
Courtship behaviour
widely varies among species. Cream-like hawk moth's courtship behaviour
consists of aphrodisiac pheromones, love songs and aerobatic flights. Firefly
uses light to attract mates. Fairy tern courtship begins with the male's flying
around the female offering her a mackerel. During the courtship, males keep
offering females more fish as gifts. Probably most bizarre behaviour during
courtship is the one observed in mantis. The female chops off the male's head
during copulation and a result of this, copulation continues more effectively
as the brain has an inhibiting effect on male's sexual performance.
Mating systems
A. Monogamy: mating
occurs with one mate only. 90% of birds are monogamous. This is because their
young require parental care (see below).
B. Polygamy: mating
occurs with many mates
1. polygyny: a
male mates with several females, occurs especially when males have the control
of resources or females. Creates strong selection for larger and stronger males
(elephant seals).
2. polyandry: a
female mates with several males. This is a very rare mating system. It occurs
when suitable breeding sites are scarce and nests are subject to heavy
predation (American Jacana or Lilly trotter).
Mating system is determined by several factors
1. Quantity of
resources: rich environments tend to favour polygyny, impoverished environments
monogamy.
2. Distribution of
resources: patchy distribution of resources favours polygyny.
3. Predation: monogamy
is favoured as a couple would better defend their territory.
4. Other determinants
of social behaviour: living in groups may alter reproductive behaviour.
5. Female availability
in time: synchronous breeding among females tends to favour polygyny.
6. Requirements of the
young: depending on the development level of the newborn and the level of care
it would require, males may be monogamous or polygynous.
In many species,
females mate with more than one male as an insurance in case the first male is
infertile. Multiple paternity also offers opportunities to increase the genetic
diversity and the survival rate of the offspring. A general rule is that the
smaller the proportion of males that mate, the more intense will be the
selection for larger male size (10% in elephant seals, hence the huge size).
Address
for bookmark: http://www.dorak.info/evolution/sselect.html
Suggested
further reading
Lecture Notes on Sexual Selection (University of British
Columbia), Albany University by JL Brown and UCSC by B Sinervo
A Lecture on Sexual Selection
and the Biology of Beauty by AP Moller
Biology of Sex Course Notes: Queens
(1), Queens (2), San Diego State University
"How
Females Choose Their Mates" (Dugatkin & Godin, Scientific American,
April 1998)
"Animal Attractions" National
Geographic, July 2003
MB Andersson. Sexual
Selection.
Princeton University Press, 1994
TR Birkhead. Promiscuity:
An Evolutionary History of Sperm Competition and Sexual Conflict. Harvard University Press, 2000
(see also the article by the same author: Hidden choices of females. Natural
History
(US), 2000;109(9):66-71
WG Eberhard & C Cordero. Sexual selection by cryptic female choice on male
seminal products - a new bridge between sexual selection and reproductive physiology.
Trends
in Ecology and Evolution 1995;10:493
J-G J Godin & LA Dugatkin. Female mating preference for bold males in the guppy, Poecilia
reticulata. Proc Natl Acad Sci 1996;93:10262-7
TH Goldsmith & WF Zimmerman: Biology, Evolution, and Human Nature. John Wiley & Sons, 2000
JL Gould & CG Gould. Sexual
Selection: Mate Choice and Courtship in Nature. Scientific American Library, 1997
Scientific American Exclusive Online Issue: Battle of the
Sexes (PDF)
J Sparks. Battle
of the Sexes. BBC, 1999
PBS Documentary: Nature of Sex
MF Willson. Sexual selection in plants and animals. Trends
in Ecology and Evolution 1990;5:210
Skogsmyr & Lankinen. Sexual Selection in Plants. Biol Rev 2002;77:537-62
A Zahavi & A Zahavi. The
Handicap Principle. OUP, 1997
Trivers RL. Parental investment and sexual selection. In Campbell BG (Ed) Sexual Selection and the Descent of Man,
1871-1971. Chicago: Aldine, 1972, pp. 136–79 (ISBN 0-43-562157-2)
Darwin C. The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to
Sex. 1871 (e-Book) - Chapter 8: Sexual Selection
M.Tevfik Dorak, MD, PhD
Last updated 16 January 2007
Evolution Genetics Population
Genetics HLA MHC Inf &
Imm Genetic
Epidemiology Epidemiology Glossary Homepage