We contrast some recent uses of the concept of male-female conflict, with the type of conflict that is inherent in traditional Darwinian female choice. Females in apparent conflict situations with males may suffer reduced lifetime reproduction, but nevertheless benefit because they obtain sons with superior manipulative abilities. Female defences against male manipulations may not be 'imperfect' because of inability to keep pace with male evolution, but in order to screen males and favour those that are especially good manipulators. We examine the consequences of these ideas, and of the difficulties of obtaining biologically realistic measures of female costs, for some recent theoretical and empirical presentations of male-female conflict ideas, and find that male-female conflict in the new sense is less certain than has been commonly supposed. Disentangling previous sexual selection ideas and the new conflict of interest models will probably often be difficult, because the two types of payoffs are not mutually exclusive.

No abstract

Most deceit-pollinated species involve floral dimorphisms characterized by the presence of rewarding male flowers and nonrewarding female flowers. It has been proposed that this polymorphism establishes the conditions for the action of frequency dependent selection (FDS). The tendency of foraging animals to aggregate in areas of high resource density suggests that pollination efficiency and fruit production may be positively influenced by flower density (density dependent selection, DDS). In this paper we offer a graphical model describing the effects of FDS and DDS on a monoecious species pollinated by deceit. We test the FDS and DDS assumptions and the predictions of the model using field observations and experimental populations of Begonia gracilis in which population sex ratio and flower density were controlled. We found a marked effect of both FDS and DDS on pollinator visitation, fruit-set, and on the probability of female flowers to setting fruits. We conclude that these two types of selection have had a strong influence on the evolution of deceit-pollinated species.