In spite of recent interest in sexual selection in females, debate exists over whether traits that influence female-female competition are sexually selected. This review uses female-female aggressive behavior as a model behavioral trait for understanding the evolutionary mechanisms promoting intrasexual competition, focusing especially on sexual selection. I employ a broad definition of sexual selection, whereby traits that influence competition for mates are sexually selected, whereas those that directly influence fecundity or offspring survival are naturally selected. Drawing examples from across animal taxa, including humans, I examine 4 predictions about female intrasexual competition based on the abundance of resources, the availability of males, and the direct or indirect benefits those males provide. These patterns reveal a key sex difference in sexual selection: Although females may compete for the number of mates, they appear to compete more so for access to high-quality mates that provide direct and indirect (genetic) benefits. As is the case in males, intrasexual selection in females also includes competition for essential resources required for access to mates. If mate quality affects the magnitude of mating success, then restricting sexual selection to competition for quantity of mates may ignore important components of fitness in females and underestimate the role of sexual selection in shaping female phenotype. In the future, understanding sex differences in sexual selection will require further exploration of the extent of mutual intrasexual competition and the incorporation of quality of mating success into the study of sexual selection in both sexes.

No abstract

Testosterone (T) regulates many traits related to fitness, including aggression. However, individual variation in aggressiveness does not always relate to circulating T, suggesting that behavioural variation may be more closely related to neural sensitivity to steroids, though this issue remains unresolved. To assess the relative importance of circulating T and neural steroid sensitivity in predicting behaviour, we measured aggressiveness during staged intrusions in free-living male and female dark-eyed juncos (Junco hyemalis). We compared aggressiveness to plasma T levels and to the abundance of androgen receptor (AR), aromatase (AROM) and oestrogen receptor alpha (ORa) mRNA in behaviourally relevant brain areas (avian medial amygdala, hypothalamus and song control regions). We also asked whether patterns of covariation among behaviour and endocrine parameters differed in males and females, anticipating that circulating T may be a better predictor of behaviour in males than in females. We found that circulating T related to aggressiveness only in males, but that gene expression for ORa, AR and AROM covaried with individual differences in aggressiveness in both sexes. These findings are among the first to show that individual variation in neural gene expression for three major sex steroid-processing molecules predicts individual variation in aggressiveness in both sexes in nature. The results have broad implications for our understanding of the mechanisms by which aggressive behaviour may evolve.

Research on male animals suggests that the hormone testosterone plays a central role in mediating the trade-off between mating effort and parental effort. However, the direct links between testosterone, intrasexual aggression and parental care are remarkably mixed across species. Previous attempts to reconcile these patterns suggest that selection favors behavioral insensitivity to testosterone when paternal care is essential to reproductive success and when breeding seasons are especially short. Females also secrete testosterone, though the degree to which similar testosterone-mediated trade-offs occur in females is much less clear. Here, I ask whether testosterone mediates trade-offs between aggression and incubation in females, and whether patterns of female sensitivity to testosterone relate to female life history, as is often the case in males. I experimentally elevated testosterone in free-living, incubating female tree swallows (Tachycineta bicolor), a songbird with a short breeding season during which female incubation and intrasexual aggression are both essential to female reproductive success. Testosterone-treated females showed significantly elevated aggression, reduced incubation temperatures, and reduced hatching success, relative to controls. Thus, prolonged testosterone elevation during incubation was detrimental to reproductive success, but females nonetheless showed behavioral sensitivity to testosterone. These findings suggest that the relative importance of both mating effort and parental effort may be central to understanding patterns of behavioral sensitivity in both sexes.

Female–female aggression often functions in competition over reproductive or social benefits, but the proximate mechanisms of this apparently adaptive behaviour are not well understood. The sex steroid hormone testosterone (T) and its metabolites are well-established mediators of male–male aggression, and several lines of evidence suggest that T-mediated mechanisms may apply to females as well. However, a key question is whether mechanisms of female aggression primarily reflect correlated evolutionary responses to selection acting on males, or whether direct selection acting on females has made modifications to these mechanisms that are adaptive in light of female life history. Here, I examine the degree to which female aggression is mediated at the level of T production, target tissue sensitivity to T, or downstream genomic responses in order to test the hypothesis that selection favours mechanisms that facilitate female aggression while minimizing the costs of systemically elevated T. I draw heavily from avian systems, including the dark-eyed junco ( Junco hyemalis ), as well as other organisms in which these mechanisms have been well studied from an evolutionary/ecological perspective in both sexes. Findings reveal that the sexes share many behavioural and hormonal mechanisms, though several patterns also suggest sex-specific adaptation. I argue that greater attention to multiple levels of analysis—from hormone to receptor to gene network, including analyses of individual variation that represents the raw material of evolutionary change—will be a fruitful path for understanding mechanisms of behavioural regulation and intersexual coevolution.