Sexual conflict

Chapman, Tracey; Arnqvist, Göran; Bangham, Jenny; Rowe, Locke

doi:10.1016/s0169-5347(02)00004-6

Cited by 983 publications

(933 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

900

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…An alternative to CFC is sexually antagonistic coevolution (SAC) between males and females (Arnqvist and Rowe 2005). The 2 hypotheses differ in the reproductive payoffs that females are thought to gain from biasing male paternity (Chapman et al 2003). The payoffs to female L. mariana from biasing plug formation are not known, so this difference between SAC and CFC cannot be evaluated confidently.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Female cooperation in plug formation in a spider: effects of male copulatory courtship

Aisenberg

Eberhard

2009

Behavioral Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the strongest indications that cryptic female choice is an evolutionary phenomenon of general importance is the widespread existence of male courtship behavior during copulation. It has been presumed that such copulatory courtship functions to induce female reproductive behavior that favors the male's reproductive interests, but this function has seldom been demonstrated. Here, we examine the possible effects of male copulatory courtship in the spider Leucauge mariana (Tetragnathidae) on whether a female will aid the male in forming a copulatory plug, thus reducing the chances that future mates will be able to inseminate her. Greater numbers of 2 behavior patterns by the male during copulation, rhythmic pushing on the female's legs with his front legs, and repeated short insertions with his genitalia were associated with increased chances that the female would cooperate in plug formation. This confirms that these behavior patterns do indeed function as courtship.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Female cooperation in plug formation in a spider: effects of male copulatory courtship

Aisenberg

Eberhard

2009

Behavioral Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Here, we focus on sexual conflict over care, although the parents might also disagree about family size, timing of breeding or the sex ratio of their offspring [6]. For a broader account of sexual conflict, see [7].The benefit that results from a particular level of care by a parent depends on the behaviour of its partner, whereas the cost of care in terms of lost mating opportunities depends on the behaviour of other members of the population. For example, if a male deserts, his chances of obtaining a new mate will depend on the number of females that have also deserted their mate and are hence available.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Conflict between parents over care

Houston

Székely

McNamara

2005

Trends in Ecology & Evolution

346

316

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conflict between parents over care of young arises when the young benefit from the effort of both parents, but each parent suffers a reduction in future reproductive success as a consequence of its own effort. Here, we review existing models and argue that they fail to capture many important components of parental conflict. For example, we lack adequate models of how a parent should compensate for a reduction in the effort of its mate. These models should incorporate the process by which decisions are reached. Recent theory suggests that a parent benefits by handicapping itself, and more experimental and theoretical work on this topic could be fruitful. We also need more theoretical work on attractiveness that incorporates consistent interactions between males and females.There are many forms of parental care and many ways in which care can be costly to a parent, in that it reduces their reproductive success in other breeding attempts [1,2]. Parental care involves a high level of energy expenditure, which might reduce the condition of the parent at the end of the breeding season. This can reduce the future survival of the care-provider and, hence, its probability of breeding the following year. A parent that deserts its mate and young has greater opportunities to pair with a new partner within the current breeding season than does a parent that cares. Even if a male remains with his mate and young, it might be possible to increase his chances of copulating with females other than his mate by decreasing his level of care and devoting more time to courting other females [3]. Such matings are known as extra-pair copulations (EPCs).Although the details vary across species, the success of the young generally depends on the care from both parents, whereas the cost to a parent depends on its own effort. Thus, a conflict of interest emerges [4,5], with each parent preferring the other to do the hard work. Here, we focus on sexual conflict over care, although the parents might also disagree about family size, timing of breeding or the sex ratio of their offspring [6]. For a broader account of sexual conflict, see [7].The benefit that results from a particular level of care by a parent depends on the behaviour of its partner, whereas the cost of care in terms of lost mating opportunities depends on the behaviour of other members of the population. For example, if a male deserts, his chances of obtaining a new mate will depend on the number of females that have also deserted their mate and are hence available. If a male seeks EPCs, then his chances of obtaining them depend on the receptiveness of females in the population and the extent to which males allocate their time to guarding their mates from other males as opposed to caring for their young or seeking EPCs [8]. These complex interactions make it difficult to use verbal arguments to predict the level of care that will evolve. Theory attempts to predict the outcome of evolution by constructing mathematical models that expose the logic of parental conflict. Here, we co...

show abstract

“…This hypothesis is supported by experimental studies, which indicate that male aggression toward females increases as a result of increased male–male competition in populations with male‐biased ASRs (Chapman, Arnqvist, Bangham, & Rowe, 2003; Le Galliard, Fitze, Ferrière, & Clobert, 2005), and this may be the main driver of female dispersal in some butterfly populations (Hovestadt & Nieminen, 2009). This process is hypothesized to be the evolutionary outcome of a sexual conflict over mating and reproduction tactics, resulting in adaptations that benefit males (in the short term) but not females (Le Galliard et al., 2005).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

Sex‐biased breeding dispersal is predicted by social environment in birds

Végvári

Katona

Vági

et al. 2018

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sex‐biased dispersal is common in vertebrates, although the ecological and evolutionary causes of sex differences in dispersal are debated. Here, we investigate sex differences in both natal and breeding dispersal distances using a large dataset on birds including 86 species from 41 families. Using phylogenetic comparative analyses, we investigate whether sex‐biased natal and breeding dispersal are associated with sexual selection, parental sex roles, adult sex ratio (ASR), or adult mortality. We show that neither the intensity of sexual selection, nor the extent of sex bias in parental care was associated with sex‐biased natal or breeding dispersal. However, breeding dispersal was related to the social environment since male‐biased ASRs were associated with female‐biased breeding dispersal. Male‐biased ASRs were associated with female‐biased breeding dispersal. Sex bias in adult mortality was not consistently related to sex‐biased breeding dispersal. These results may indicate that the rare sex has a stronger tendency to disperse in order to find new mating opportunities. Alternatively, higher mortality of the more dispersive sex could account for biased ASRs, although our results do not give a strong support to this explanation. Whichever is the case, our findings improve our understanding of the causes and consequences of sex‐biased dispersal. Since the direction of causality is not yet known, we call for future studies to identify the causal relationships linking mortality, dispersal, and ASR.

show abstract

Sexual conflict

Cited by 983 publications

References 53 publications

Female cooperation in plug formation in a spider: effects of male copulatory courtship

Female cooperation in plug formation in a spider: effects of male copulatory courtship

Conflict between parents over care

Sex‐biased breeding dispersal is predicted by social environment in birds

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About