Models of sexual selection by mate choice have emphasized the evolution of sexually dimorphic costly signals, such as elaborate plumage or courtship display, in the sex exhibiting higher reproductive skew, usually males. Less well explored is the action of mutual mate choice in driving signal evolution in socially monogamous or near-monogamous populations. We present a simulation model of condition-dependent investment in a signal trait under conditions of perfect monogamy, equal initial offspring number, and differential offspring mortality based on inherited genetic quality minus signal cost. The model demonstrates persistent evolution of high-cost sexual ornaments through mutual mate choice, even under strict monogamy, as long as the phenotypic condition is sufficiently heritable, and the monomorphic ornament reflects condition with sufficient accuracy to allow positive assortative mating. We discuss implications for research on sexual selection, mate choice, mutation-selection balance, and human evolution.
Amundsen, T. (2000). Why are female birds ornamented? Trends in Ecology &Evolution, 15(4), 149—155.
2.
Amundsen, T., & Forsgren, E. (2003). Male preference for colourful females affected by male size in a marine fish. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology , 54(1), 55—64.
3.
Benton, T.G., & Evans, M.R. (1998). Measuring mate choice using correlation: The effect of female sampling behaviour. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology , 44(2), 91—98.
4.
Berglund, A., Bisazza, A., & Pilastro, A. (1996). Armaments and ornaments: An evolutionary explanation of traits of dual utility. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 58(4), 385—399.
5.
Berglund, A., Widemo, M.S., & Rosenqvist, G. (2005). Sex-role reversal revisited: Choosy females and ornamented, competitive males in a pipefish. BehavioralEcology, 16(3), 649—655.
6.
Bergstrom, C.T., & Real, L.A. (2000). Towards a theory of mutual mate choice: Lessons from two-sided matching. Evolutionary Ecology Research, 2(4), 493—508.
7.
Boland, C.R.J., Double, M.C., & Baker, G.B. (2004). Assortative mating by tail streamer length in Red-tailed Tropic-birds Phaethon rubricauda breeding in the Coral Sea. Ibis, 146(4), 687—690.
8.
Borgerhoff Mulder, M. (2004). Are men and women really so different? Trends in Ecology &Evolution, 19(1), 3— 6.
9.
Buss, D.M., Reis, H.T., & Rusbult, C.E. (2004). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. In Close relationships: Key readings. (pp. 135—151). New York: Taylor & Francis.
10.
Candolin, U. (2003). The use of multiple cues in mate choice. Biological Reviews, 78(4), 575—595.
11.
Darwin, C. (1871). The descent of man and selection in relation to sex. London: John Murray.
12.
Daunt, F., Monaghan, P., Wanless, S., & Harris, M.P. (2003). Sexual ornament size and breeding performance in female and male European Shags Phalacrocorax aristotelis. Ibis, 145(1), 54—60.
13.
Derix, R.R.W.M., & van Hooff, J.A.R.A.M. (1995). Male and female preferences in a captive wolf pack (Canis lupus)—Specificity versus spread of sexual attention. Behaviour, 132, 127—149.
14.
Endler, J.A., & Basolo, A.L. (1998). Sensory ecology, receiver biases and sexual selection. Trends in Ecology &Evolution, 13(10), 415.
15.
Faivre, B., Preault, M., Thery, M., Secondi, J., Patris, B., & Cezilly, F. (2001). Breeding strategy and morphological characters in an urban population of blackbirds, Turdus merula. Animal Behaviour, 61, 969—974.
16.
Fuentes, A. (1998). Re-evaluating primate monogamy. American Anthropologist, 100(4), 890—907.
17.
Fuller, R.C., Houle, D., & Travis, J. (2005). Sensory bias as an explanation for the evolution of mate preferences. American Naturalist, 166(4), 437—446.
18.
Gangestad, S.W., Bennett, K.L., & Thornhill, R. (2001). A latent variable model of developmental instability in relation to men's sexual behaviour. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences, 268(1477), 1677—1684.
Geher, G., & Miller, G. F. (Eds.). (2007). Mating intelligence: Sex, relationships, and the mind's reproductive system. Mahway, NJ: Erlbaum.
21.
Geissmann, T., & Orgeldinger, M. (2000). The relationship between duet songs and pair bonds in siamangs, Hylobates syndactylus. Animal Behaviour, 60(6), 805—809.
22.
Gintis, H. (2000). Game theory evolving. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
23.
Grammer, K., Fink, B., Møller, A.P., & Thornhill, R. (2003). Darwinian aesthetics: Sexual selection and the biology of beauty. Biological Reviews, 78(3), 385—407.
24.
Griffith, S.C., Owens, I.P.F., & Thuman, K.A. (2002). Extra pair paternity in birds: A review of interspecific variation and adaptive function. Molecular Ecology, 11(11), 2195— 2212.
25.
Griggio, M., Valera, F., Casas, A., & Pilastro, A. (2005). Males prefer ornamented females: A field experiment of male choice in the rock sparrow. Animal Behaviour, 69(6), 1243—1250.
26.
Griskevicius, V., Tybur, J.M., Sundie, J.M., Cialdini, R.B., Miller, G.F., & Kenrick, D.T. (2007). Blatant benevolence and conspicuous consumption: When romantic motives elicit costly displays. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(1), 85—102.
27.
Hanssen, S.A., Folstad, I., & Erikstad, K.E. (2006). White plumage reflects individual quality in female eiders. Animal Behaviour, 71(2), 337—343.
28.
Haselton, M.G., & Miller, G.R. (2006). Women's fertility across the cycle increases the short-term attractiveness of creative intelligence. Human Nature, 17(1), 50—73.
29.
Hoefler, C.D. (2007). Male mate choice and size-assortative pairing in a jumping spider, Phidippus clarus. Animal Behaviour, 73(6), 943—954.
30.
Houde, A.E. (2001). Sex roles, ornaments, and evolutionary explanation . Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 98(23), 12857—12859.
31.
Houle, D., & Kondrashov, A.S. (2002). Coevolution of costly mate choice and condition-dependent display of good genes. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences, 269(1486), 97—104.
32.
Iwasa, Y., & Pomiankowski, A. (1999). Good parent and good genes models of handicap evolution. Journal of TheoreticalBiology, 200(1), 97—109.
33.
Jawor, J.M., Linville, S.U., Beall, S.M., & Breitwisch, R. (2003). Assortative mating by multiple ornaments in northern cardinals (Cardinalis cardinalis). BehavioralEcology, 14(4), 515—520.
34.
Johnstone, R.A. (1997a). The evolution of animal signals. In J. R. Krebs & N. B. Davies (Eds.), Behavioural ecology: an evolutionary approach (4th ed., pp. 155—178). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
35.
Johnstone, R.A. (1997b). The tactics of mutual mate choice and competitive search. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 40(1), 51—59.
36.
Johnstone, R.A., Reynolds, J.D., & Deutsch, J.C. (1996). Mutual mate choice and sex differences in choosiness . Evolution, 50(4), 1382—1391.
37.
Kanazawa, S., & Kovar, J.L. (2004). Why beautiful people are more intelligent. Intelligence, 32(3), 227—243.
38.
Kirkpatrick, M. (2000). Reinforcement and divergence under assortative mating. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences, 267(1453), 1649— 1655.
39.
Kirkpatrick, M., Price, T., & Arnold, S.J. (1990). The Darwin-Fisher theory of selection in monogamous birds. Evolution, 44(1), 180—193.
40.
Kodric-Brown, A., Sibly, R.M., & Brown, J.H. (2006). The allometry of ornaments and weapons. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103(23), 8733—8738.
41.
Kokko, H. (1998). Should advertising parental care be honest?Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences, 265(1408), 1871—1878.
42.
Kokko, H., Brooks, R., Jennions, M.D., & Morley, J. (2003). The evolution of mate choice and mating biases . Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences, 270(1515), 653—664.
43.
Kokko, H., & Jennions, M. (2003). It takes two to tango. Trends in Ecology &Evolution, 18(3), 103—104.
44.
Kokko, H., & Johnstone, R.A. (2002). Why is mutual mate choice not the norm? Operational sex ratios, sex roles and the evolution of sexually dimorphic and monomorphic signalling. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences, 357(1419), 319—330.
45.
Marlowe, F.W. (2005). Hunter-gatherers and human evolution. Evolutionary Anthropology, 14, 54—67.
46.
Masello, J.F., Pagnossin, M.L., Lubjuhn, T., & Quillfeldt, P. (2004). Ornamental non-carotenoid red feathers of wild burrowing parrots. Ecological Research , 19(4), 421—432.
47.
Masello, J.F., & Quillfeldt, P. (2003). Body size, body condition and ornamental feathers of Burrowing Parrots: Variation between years and sexes, assortative mating and influences on breeding success. Emu, 103(2), 149—161.
48.
Massaro, M., Davis, L.S., & Darby, J.T. (2003). Carotenoid-derived ornaments reflect parental quality in male and female yellow-eyed penguins (Megadyptes antipodes). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 55(2), 169—175.
49.
Miller, G.F. (2000). The mating mind: how sexual choice shaped the evolution of human nature. New York: Anchor Books.
50.
Miller, G.F. (2007). Sexual selection for moral virtues. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 82(2), 97—125.
51.
Miller, G.F., & Penke, L. (2007). The evolution of human intelligence and the coefficient of additive genetic variance in human brain size. Intelligence , 35(2), 97—114.
52.
Miller, G.F., & Tal, I. (2007). Schizotypy versus intelligence and openness as predictors of creativity. Schizophrenia Research, 93(1—3), 317—324.
53.
Morales, J., Moreno, J., Merino, S., Sanz, J.J., Tomas, G., Arriero, E., et al. (2007). Female ornaments in the pied flycatcher Ficedula hypoleuca: Associations with age, health and reproductive success . Ibis, 149(2), 245—254.
54.
Mougeot, F., Redpath, S.M., & Leckie, F. (2005). Ultra-violet reflectance of male and female red grouse, Lagopus lagopus scoticus: Sexual ornaments reflect nematode parasite intensity. Journal of Avian Biology, 36(3), 203—209.
55.
Paul, A. (2002). Sexual selection and mate choice. International Journal of Primatology, 23(4), 877—904.
56.
Pelabon, C., Borg, A.A., Bjelvenmark, J., Forsgren, E., Barber, I., & Amundsen, T. (2003). Do male two-spotted gobies prefer large fecund females? BehavioralEcology, 14(6), 787—792.
57.
Penton-Voak, I.S., Jones, B.C., Little, A.C., Baker, S., Tiddeman, B., Burt, D.M., et al. (2001). Symmetry, sexual dimorphism in facial proportions and male facial attractiveness. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences, 268(1476), 1617—1623.
58.
Pilastro, A., Griggio, M., & Matessi, G. (2003). Male rock sparrows adjust their breeding strategy according to female ornamentation: parental or mating investment?Animal Behaviour, 66, 265—271.
59.
Potti, J., & Merino, S. (1996). Decreased levels of blood trypanosome infection correlate with female expression of a male secondary sexual trait: Implications for sexual selection. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences, 263(1374), 1199—1204.
60.
Preston, B.T., Stevenson, I.R., Pemberton, J.M., Coltman, D.W., & Wilson, K. (2005). Male mate choice influences female promiscuity in Soay sheep. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 272(1561), 365— 373.
61.
Prokosch, M.D., Yeo, R.A., & Miller, G.F. (2005). Intelligence tests with higher g-loadings show higher correlations with body symmetry: Evidence for a general fitness factor mediated by developmental stability. Intelligence, 33(2), 203—213.
62.
Rasa, O.A.E. (1977). Ethology and sociology of dwarf mongoose (Helogale undulata rufula). Zeitschrift fur Tierpsychologie-Journal of ComparativeEthology, 43(4), 337— 406.
63.
Roulin, A., Dijkstra, C., Riols, C., & Ducrest, A.L. (2001). Female- and male-specific signals of quality in the barn owl. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 14(2), 255—266.
64.
Ryan, M.J. (1998). Sexual selection, receiver biases, and the evolution of sex differences. Science, 281(5385), 1999.
65.
Safran, R.J., & McGraw, K.J. (2004). Plumage coloration, not length or symmetry of tail-streamers, is a sexually selected trait in North American barn swallows. Behavioral Ecology, 15(3), 455—461.
66.
Sandvik, M., Rosenqvist, G., & Berglund, A. (2000). Male and female mate choice affects offspring quality in a sex-role-reversed pipefish. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences, 267(1458), 2151— 2155.
67.
Setchell, J.M., & Wickings, E.J. (2005). Dominance, status signals and coloration in male mandrills (Mandrillus sphinx). Ethology , 111(1), 25—50.
68.
Shaner, A., Miller, G., & Mintz, J. (2004). Schizophrenia as one extreme of a sexually selected fitness indicator. Schizophrenia Research, 70(1), 101—109.
69.
Siefferman, L., & Hill, G.E. (2005). Evidence for sexual selection on structural plumage coloration in female eastern bluebirds (Sialia sialis). Evolution , 59(8), 1819—1828.
70.
Smith, E.A., & Bliege Bird, R.L. (2000). Turtle hunting and tombstone opening: Public generosity as costly signaling. Evolution andHuman Behavior, 21(4), 245—261.
71.
Sommer, V., & Reichard, U. (2000). Rethinking monogamy: The gibbon case. In P. Kappeler (Ed.), Primate males (pp. 159—168). Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press.
72.
Spence, M. (1973). Job market signaling. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 87(3), 355—374.
73.
Szykman, M., Engh, A.L., Van Horn, R.C., Funk, S.M., Scribner, K.T., & Holekamp, K.E. (2001). Association patterns among male and female spotted hyenas (Crocuta crocuta) reflect male mate choice . Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 50(3), 231—238.
74.
Velando, A., Lessells, C.M., & Marquez, J.C. (2001). The function of female and male ornaments in the Inca Tern: Evidence for links between ornament expression and both adult condition and reproductive performance. Journal of Avian Biology, 32(4), 311—318.
75.
Weiss, S.L. (2006). Female-specific color is a signal of quality in the striped plateau lizard (Sceloporus virgatus). BehavioralEcology, 17(5), 726.
76.
Westneat, D.F., & Stewart, I.R.K. (2003). Extra-pair paternity in birds: Causes, correlates, and conflict. In Annual review of ecology evolution and systematics (pp. 365—396). Palo Alto: Annual Reviews.
77.
Zahavi, A., & Zahavi, A. (1997). The handicap principle: A missing piece of Darwin's puzzle. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
78.
Zeh, J.A., & Zeh, D.W. (2003). Toward a new sexual selection paradigm: Polyandry, conflict and incompatibility. Ethology, 109(12), 929—950.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
