Although evidence is mounting that female mating preferences evolve at least in part as inciden tal (pleiotropic) consequences of alleles favored by natural selection, it is less clear how such pref erences can evolve when they are initially maladaptive, as by delaying reproduction. I extend a previous model by Tomlinson and O'Donald (1996) to investigate how dominance, sex-linkage, and sex-limitation affect the evolution of a costly new female preference. I find that recessivity of the new female preference can allow it to spread as a pleiotropic byproduct of adaptive evolution even when the novel preference is initially extremely detrimental. Further, three predictions of this model are satisfied by empirical data on the genetics of female mating preferences in Drosophila. Taken together, these findings suggest that incidental association of novel female preferences with alleles under selection could be a potent force in the origin and evolution of novel female mating preferences.
Anderson, W.W. (1993). Linkage map of Drosophila pseudoobscura. In S. J. O'Brien (Ed.), Genetic Maps: Locus Maps of Complex Genomes (pp. 3.252-3.253). Plainview, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press.
2.
Arak, A. & Enquist, M. (1993). Hidden preferences and the evolution of signals . Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series B, 340, 207-213.
3.
Basolo, A.L. (1995). Phylogenetic evidence for the role of a pre-existing bias in sexual selection. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B, 259, 307-311.
4.
Bulmer, M. (1989). Structural instability of models of sexual selection . Theoretical Population Biology, 35, 195-206.
5.
Charlesworth, B., Coyne, J.A. & Barton, N.H. (1987). The relative rates of evolution of sex chromosomes and autosomes. American Naturalist, 130, 113-146.
6.
Clark, D.L. & Uetz, G.W. (1992). Morph-independent mate selection in dimorphic jumping spider : demonstration of movement bias in female choice using video-controlled courtship behavior. Animal Behavior, 43, 247-254.
7.
Coyne, J.A. (1989). Genetics of sexual isolation between two sibling species, Drosophila simulans and Drosophila mauritiana. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 86, 5464-5468.
8.
Curtsinger, J.W. & Heisler, I.L. (1988). A diploid "sexy son" model. American Naturalist, 132, 437-453.
9.
Darwin, C. (1871). The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex. London: J. Murray.
10.
Dawkins, M.S. & Guilford, T. (1996). Sensory bias and the adaptiveness of female choice . American Naturalist, 148, 937-942.
11.
Enquist, M. & Arak, A. (1993). Selection of exaggerated male traits by female aesthetic senses. Nature, 361, 446-448.
12.
Fisher, R.A. (1958). The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection. New York: Dover.
13.
Gomulkiewicz, R.S. & Hastings, A. (1990). Ploidy and evolution by sexual selection: A comparison of haploid and diploid female choice models near fixation equilibria. Evolution, 44, 757-770.
14.
Hamilton, W.D. & Zuk, M. (1982). Heritable true fitness and bright birds: A role for parasites. Science, 218, 384-387.
15.
Heisler, I.L. & Curtsinger, J.W. (1990). Dynamics of sexual selection in diploid populations. Evolution, 44, 1164-1176.
16.
Holland, B. & Rice, W.R. (1998). Chase-away sexual selection: Antagonistic seduction versus resistance. Evolution, 52, 1-7.
17.
Kaneshiro, K.Y. (1989). The Dynamics of Sexual Selection and Founder Effects in Species Formation. In L. V Giddings, K. Y. Kaneshiro, W. W Anderson (Eds.), Genetics, Speciation and the Founder Principle (pp. 279-296). New York: Oxford University Press
18.
Kirkpatrick, M. (1985). Evolution of female choice and male parental investment in polygynous species: The demise of the "sexy son." American Naturalist, 125, 788-810.
19.
Kirkpatrick, M. (1987a). The evolutionary forces acting on female mating preferences in polygynous animals. In J. W Bradbury, M. B. Andersson (Eds.), Sexual Selection: Testing the Alternatives (pp. 67-82). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
20.
Kirkpatrick, M. (1987b). Sexual selection by female choice in polygynous animals. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 18, 43-70.
21.
Kirkpatrick, M. (1996). Good genes and direct selection in the evolution of mating preferences. Evolution, 50, 2125-2140.
22.
Kirkpatrick, M. & Barton, N.H. (1997). The strength of indirect selection on female mating preferences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 94, 1282-1286.
23.
Kirkpatrick, M. & Ryan, M.J. (1991). The evolution of mating preferences and the paradox of the lek. Nature, 350, 33-38.
24.
Krebs, R.A. (1990). Courtship behavior and control of reproductive isolation in Drosophila mojavensis: Genetic analysis of population hybrids . Behavior Genetics, 20, 535-543.
25.
McClintock, W.J. & Uetz, G.W. (1996). Female choice and pre-existing bias: visual cues during courtship in two Schizocosa wolf spiders (Araneae: Lycosidae). Animal Behaviour, 52, 167-181.
26.
Mitra, S., Landel, H. & Pruett-Jones, S. (1996). Species richness covaries with mating system in birds. Auk, 113, 544-551.
27.
Noor, M.A.F. (1996). Absence of species discrimination in Drosophila pseudoobscura and D. persimilis males. Animal Behaviour, 52, 1205-1210. O'Donald, P. (1967). A general model of sexual and natural selection. Heredity, 22, 499-518.
28.
Orr, H.A. (1995). A new linkage map of the D. pseudoobscura X chromosome . Drosophila Information Service, 76, 127-128.
29.
Pomiankowski, A. (1987). The costs of choice in sexual selection. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 128, 195-218.
30.
Price, T. (1998). Sexual selection and natural selection in bird speciation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series B, 353, 251-260.
31.
Proctor, H.C. (1991). Courtship in the water mite Neumania papillator: males capitalize on female adaptations for predation. Animal Behaviour, 42, 589-598.
32.
Rice, W.R. & Holland, B. (1997). The enemies within : intergenomic conflict, interlocus contest evolution (ICE), and the intraspecific red queen. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 41, 1-10.
33.
Rice, W.R. & Hostert, E.E. (1993). Laboratory experiments on speciation: What have we learned in forty years? Evolution, 47, 1637-1653.
34.
Ryan, M.J. & Rand, A.S. (1993). Sexual selection and signal evolution: the ghosts of biases past. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series B, 340, 187-195.
35.
Spencer, H.G., McArdle, B.H. & Lambert, D.M. (1986). A theoretical investigation of speciation by reinforcement . The American Naturalist, 128, 241-262.
36.
Tan, C.C. (1946). Genetics of sexual isolation between Drosophila pseudoobscura and Drosophila persimilis. Genetics, 31, 558-573.
37.
Tomlinson, I.P.M. & O'Donald, P. (1996). The influence of female viability differences on the evolution of mate choice. Heredity, 77, 303-312.
38.
True, J.R., Weir, B.S. & Laurie, C.C. (1996). A genome-wide survey of hybrid incompatibility factors by the introgression of marked segments of Drosophila mauritiana chromosomes into Drosophila simulans. Genetics, 142, 819-837.
39.
Turner, J.R.G. (1981). Adaptation and evolution in Heliconius: A Defense of NeoDarwinism. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics , 12, 99-121.
40.
Wasserman, M. & Koepfer, H.R. (1977). Character displacement for sexual isolation between Drosophila mojavensis and Drosophila arizonensis. Evolution , 31, 812-823.
41.
Wu, C.-I., Hollocher, H., Begun, D.J., Aquadro, C.F., Xu, Y. & Wu, M.-L. (1995). Sexual isolation in Drosophila melanogaster. A possible case of incipient speciation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 92, 2519-2523.
42.
Zahavi, A. (1975). Mate selection- A selection for a handicap. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 53, 205-214.
