12
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      From ornament to armament or loss of function? Breeding plumage acquisition in a genetically monogamous bird

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The evolution of conspicuous male traits is thought to be driven by female mate choice or male-male competition. These two mechanisms are often viewed as distinct processes, with most studies focusing on female choice. However, both mechanisms of sexual selection can act simultaneously on the same trait (i.e., dual function) and/or interact in a synergistic or conflicting way. Dual-function traits are commonly assumed to originate through male-male competition before being used in female choice; yet, most studies focusing on such traits could not determine the direction of change, lacking phylogenetic information. We investigated the role of conspicuous male seasonal plumage in male-male competitive interactions in the purple-crowned fairy-wren Malurus coronatus, a cooperatively breeding bird. Male breeding plumage in most Malurus species is selected by female choice through extra-pair mate choice, but unlike its congeners, M. coronatus is genetically monogamous, and females do not seem to choose males based on breeding plumage acquisition. Our study shows that, within groups, subordinate males that were older, and therefore higher-ranked in the queue for breeder position inheritance, produced a more complete breeding plumage. In line with this, subordinate males that were older and/or displayed a more complete breeding plumage were more successful in competitively acquiring a breeder position. A role as a signal of competitive ability was experimentally confirmed by presenting models of males: in breeding colours, these received more aggression from resident breeder males than in nonbreeding colours, but elicited limited response from females, consistent with competitors in breeding plumage being perceived as a bigger threat to the breeder male. The role of the conspicuous breeding plumage in mediating male-male interactions might account for its presence in this genetically monogamous species. As phylogenetic reconstructions suggest a past female choice function in M. coronatus, this could represent a sexual trait that shifted functions, or a dual-function trait that lost one function. These evolutionary scenarios imply that intra- and intersexual functions of ornaments may be gained or lost independently and offer new perspectives in understanding the complex dynamics of sexual selection.

          Related collections

          Most cited references34

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Sexual selection in males and females.

          Research on sexual selection shows that the evolution of secondary sexual characters in males and the distribution of sex differences are more complex than was initially suggested but does not undermine our understanding of the evolutionary mechanisms involved. However, the operation of sexual selection in females has still received relatively little attention. Recent studies show that both intrasexual competition between females and male choice of mating partners are common, leading to strong sexual selection in females and, in extreme cases, to reversals in the usual pattern of sex differences in behavior and morphology.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Armaments and ornaments: an evolutionary explanation of traits of dual utility

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              How is female mate choice affected by male competition?

              The plethora of studies devoted to the topics of male competition and female mate choice belie the fact that their interaction remains poorly understood. Indeed, on the question of whether competition should help or hinder the choice process, opinions scattered throughout the sexual selection literature seem unnecessarily polarised. We argue, in the light of recent theoretical and empirical advances, that the effect of competition on mate choice depends on whether it results in the choosy sex attaining high breeding value for total fitness, considering both direct and indirect fitness benefits. Specifically, trade-offs may occur between different fitness benefits if some are correlated with male competitive ability whilst others are not. Moreover, the costs and benefits of mating with competitive males may vary in time and/or space. These considerations highlight the importance of injecting a life-history perspective into sexual selection studies. Within this context, we turn to the sexual selection literature to try to offer insights into the circumstances when competition might be expected to have positive or negative implications for pre-copulatory female choice. In this regard, we elaborate on three stages where competition might impact upon the choice process: (i) during mate detection, (ii) mate evaluation, and (iii) in dictating actual mating outcomes. We conclude by offering researchers several potentially rewarding avenues for future research.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal of Animal Ecology
                J Anim Ecol
                Wiley
                00218790
                September 2018
                September 2018
                June 25 2018
                : 87
                : 5
                : 1274-1285
                Affiliations
                [1 ]School of Biological Sciences; Monash University; Clayton Vic. Australia
                [2 ]School of BioSciences; University of Melbourne; Melbourne Vic. Australia
                [3 ]Max Planck Institute for Ornithology; Vogelwarte Radolfzell; Radolfzell Germany
                [4 ]Behavioural and Physiological Ecology; Groningen Institute for Evolutionary Life Sciences; University of Groningen; Groningen The Netherlands
                Article
                10.1111/1365-2656.12855
                29943467
                90c408f9-fe9d-4f2e-9c25-a1bdf7974d83
                © 2018

                http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1

                http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#am

                http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article