2019
DOI: 10.1093/biolinnean/blz112
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Factors that affect non-independent mate choice

Abstract: Mate choice is generally regarded as an independent event, but a growing body of evidence indicates that it can be influenced by social information provided by conspecifics. This is known as non-independent mate choice. Individuals use information gathered by observing interactions between conspecifics to copy or not copy the mate choice of these conspecifics. In this review, we examine the factors that affect non-independent mate choice and mate choice copying and how it is influenced by social and environmen… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 120 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The dataset supporting this article, including a description file, has been uploaded as part of the electronic supplementary material [36].…”
Section: Data Accessibilitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The dataset supporting this article, including a description file, has been uploaded as part of the electronic supplementary material [36].…”
Section: Data Accessibilitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One approach to infer the strength of RI and understand the potential outcomes of hybridization is to quantify patterns of phenotypic diversity and assortative mating across a contact zone. Traits that evolved through sexual selection, such as advertisement calls, colour patterns and other courtship behaviours are particularly tractable and relevant (Detto & Backwell, 2009; Owen & Tucker, 2006; Scauzillo & Ferkin, 2019; Summers et al, 1999). Hybridization can manifest as two general patterns, a blending of parental forms (i.e.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This approach can extend (or contrast with) findings from lab‐based mate choice studies, which generally test individual preferences, but do not always account for the myriad of other factors that affect choice. These factors include, but are not limited to, timing, predation, territoriality, mate choice of other sex and physiological state of the choosy sex (Scauzillo & Ferkin, 2019). Some species exhibit strong RI in a contact zone, such as tidepool copepods ( Tigriopus californicus ), which have a sharp reproductive divide between parental populations (Peterson et al, 2013) or fire‐bellied toads ( Bombina sp.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Laboratory studies permit a tight control over confounding variables potentially affecting mate choice (e.g., age, size, health status, mating history, personality, etc. ), but they may not always emulate all the factors influencing mate choice in the wild such as habitat structure or natural population density (Scauzillo & Ferkin, 2019). Moreover, the handful of model species from which our understanding of NIMC is derived may not represent the diversity of mating systems and environments that could influence the evolution and maintenance of NIMC in nature.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%