Good parent and good genes models of handicap evolution.

We previously studied a good genes handicap model in which male quality was heritable and improved offspring viability. We extend our analysis to species in which males provide direct benefits (e.g. parental care, better resources, the absence of contagious diseases). Male quality now affects female fitness by increasing female reproductive success. For this good parent handicap to work, the male signal must have condition-dependent expression. The equilibrium strength of female preference is controlled by the product of signal transmission efficiency, phenotypic variance of male quality and the effectiveness of male quality in improving female reproductive success. The equilibrium resulting from the good parent handicap has exactly the same form as with the good genes handicap. This allows us to compare the relative importance of these two forces in the evolution of female preferences. The handicap models (both good genes and good parent) also show cyclic evolution, as happens with the pure Fisherian model. However, we predict that the handicap process is often strong enough to lead to a stable equilibrium. This leads to the conclusion that cyclic evolution is less likely to occur for handicap than Fisherian traits.

[1]  G. Hoelzer The good parent process of sexual selection , 1989, Animal Behaviour.

[2]  R. Knapp,et al.  Courtship as an honest indicator of male parental quality in the bicolor damselfish stegastes partitus , 1991 .

[3]  Y. Iwasa,et al.  Evolution of multiple sexual preferences by Fisher’s runaway process of sexual selection , 1993, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[4]  D. Schluter,et al.  Honesty, perception and population divergence in sexually selected traits , 1993, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[5]  Yoshinari Tanaka SOCIAL SELECTION AND THE EVOLUTION OF ANIMAL SIGNALS , 1996, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[6]  A. Møller Sexual Selection and the Barn Swallow , 1994 .

[7]  Andrew Cockburn An Introduction to Evolutionary Ecology , 1991 .

[8]  G. Hill Plumage coloration is a sexually selected indicator of male quality , 1991, Nature.

[9]  D. Schluter,et al.  Sexual selection when the female directly benefits , 1993 .

[10]  R. Montgomerie,et al.  Plumage colour signals nutritional condition in the house finch , 1994, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[11]  P. David,et al.  Male sexual ornament size but not asymmetry reflects condition in stalk–eyed flies , 1998, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[12]  A. P. Møller,et al.  Sexual selection in the monogamous barn swallow (Hirundo rustica). II. Mechanisms of sexual selection , 1992 .

[13]  A. Grafen Biological signals as handicaps. , 1990, Journal of theoretical biology.

[14]  R. Lande Models of speciation by sexual selection on polygenic traits. , 1981, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[15]  Y. Iwasa,et al.  Female Mate Preference to Maximize Paternal Care: A Two-Step Game , 1996, The American Naturalist.

[16]  K. Norris Heritable variation in a plumage indicator of viability in male great tits Parus major , 1993, Nature.

[17]  A. Pomiankowski The costs of choice in sexual selection. , 1987, Journal of theoretical biology.

[18]  J. Heywood SEXUAL SELECTION BY THE HANDICAP MECHANISM , 1989, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[19]  G. Sætre,et al.  Food provisioning in the pied flycatcher: do females gain direct benefits from choosing bright-coloured males? , 1995 .

[20]  Y. Iwasa,et al.  THE EVOLUTION OF COSTLY MATE PREFERENCES II. THE “HANDICAP” PRINCIPLE , 1991, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[21]  Y. Iwasa,et al.  Runaway ornament diversity caused by Fisherian sexual selection. , 1998, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[22]  Shigeo Yachi How can honest signalling evolve? The role of handicap principle , 1995, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[23]  N. Burley Sexual Selection for Aesthetic Traits in Species with Biparental Care , 1986, The American Naturalist.

[24]  M. Andersson EVOLUTION OF CONDITION‐DEPENDENT SEX ORNAMENTS AND MATING PREFERENCES: SEXUAL SELECTION BASED ON VIABILITY DIFFERENCES , 1986, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[25]  Yoh Iwasa,et al.  THE EVOLUTION OF COSTLY MATE PREFERENCES I. FISHER AND BIASED MUTATION , 1991, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[26]  Y. Iwasa,et al.  THE EVOLUTION OF MATE PREFERENCES FOR MULTIPLE SEXUAL ORNAMENTS , 1994, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[27]  Y. Iwasa,et al.  Continual change in mate preferences , 1995, Nature.

[28]  R. Johnstone Honest signalling, perceptual error and the evolution of ‘all-or-nothing’ displays , 1994, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.