The evolution of mating preferences for genetic attractiveness and quality in the presence of sensory bias

The aesthetic preferences of potential mates have driven the evolution of a baffling diversity of elaborate ornaments. Which fitness benefit-if any-choosers gain from expressing such preferences is controversial, however. Here, we simulate the evolution of preferences for multiple ornament types (e....

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - PNAS 2022-08, Vol.119 (33), p.e2206262119-e2206262119
Hauptverfasser: Henshaw, Jonathan M, Fromhage, Lutz, Jones, Adam G
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page e2206262119
container_issue 33
container_start_page e2206262119
container_title Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - PNAS
container_volume 119
creator Henshaw, Jonathan M
Fromhage, Lutz
Jones, Adam G
description The aesthetic preferences of potential mates have driven the evolution of a baffling diversity of elaborate ornaments. Which fitness benefit-if any-choosers gain from expressing such preferences is controversial, however. Here, we simulate the evolution of preferences for multiple ornament types (e.g., "Fisherian," "handicap," and "indicator" ornaments) that differ in their associations with genes for attractiveness and other components of fitness. We model the costs of preference expression in a biologically plausible way, which decouples costly mate search from cost-free preferences. Ornaments of all types evolved in our model, but their occurrence was far from random. Females typically preferred ornaments that carried information about a male's quality, defined here as his ability to acquire and metabolize resources. Highly salient ornaments, which key into preexisting perceptual biases, were also more likely to evolve. When males expressed quality-dependent ornaments, females invested readily in costly mate search to locate preferred males. In contrast, the genetic benefits associated with purely arbitrary ornaments were insufficient to sustain highly costly mate search. Arbitrary ornaments could nonetheless "piggyback" on mate-search effort favored by other, quality-dependent ornaments. We further show that the potential to produce attractive male offspring ("sexy sons") can be as important as producing offspring of high general quality ("good genes") in shaping female preferences, even when preferred ornaments are quality dependent. Our model highlights the importance of mate-search effort as a driver of aesthetic coevolution.
doi_str_mv 10.1073/pnas.2206262119
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9388091</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2700315705</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c421t-f14c83e6ef21b2c8466e1724731fff5d0b7393a4f26da7635b07c49b477359343</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkc1LHDEYxoModbU9eysBL72MvvmYyeRSKGJVELzYc8hkkzXLbLImmYX9783gR1tPScjveXif90HojMAFAcEut0HnC0qhox0lRB6gBQFJmo5LOEQLACqanlN-jE5yXgOAbHv4go5ZK5kUwBdo_fhksd3FcSo-Bhwd3ujiwwpvk3U22WBsxi4mvLLBFm-wLiVpU_yuvnPGOizx86RHX_bYB1yqW1XmWTeb1UuOaY8Hr_NXdOT0mO23t_MU_fl9_Xh129w_3Nxd_bpvDKekNI5w0zPbWUfJQE3Pu84SQblgxDnXLmEQTDLNHe2WWnSsHUAYLgcuxByLs1P089V3Ow0buzQ21IlHtU1-o9NeRe3V_z_BP6lV3CnJ-r5urxr8eDNI8XmyuaiNz8aOow42TllRAcBIK6Ct6PkndB2nFGq8meIMeC9n6vKVMinmXBf7MQwBNfeo5h7V3x6r4vu_GT749-LYCw9AmuM</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2704304895</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The evolution of mating preferences for genetic attractiveness and quality in the presence of sensory bias</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><creator>Henshaw, Jonathan M ; Fromhage, Lutz ; Jones, Adam G</creator><creatorcontrib>Henshaw, Jonathan M ; Fromhage, Lutz ; Jones, Adam G</creatorcontrib><description>The aesthetic preferences of potential mates have driven the evolution of a baffling diversity of elaborate ornaments. Which fitness benefit-if any-choosers gain from expressing such preferences is controversial, however. Here, we simulate the evolution of preferences for multiple ornament types (e.g., "Fisherian," "handicap," and "indicator" ornaments) that differ in their associations with genes for attractiveness and other components of fitness. We model the costs of preference expression in a biologically plausible way, which decouples costly mate search from cost-free preferences. Ornaments of all types evolved in our model, but their occurrence was far from random. Females typically preferred ornaments that carried information about a male's quality, defined here as his ability to acquire and metabolize resources. Highly salient ornaments, which key into preexisting perceptual biases, were also more likely to evolve. When males expressed quality-dependent ornaments, females invested readily in costly mate search to locate preferred males. In contrast, the genetic benefits associated with purely arbitrary ornaments were insufficient to sustain highly costly mate search. Arbitrary ornaments could nonetheless "piggyback" on mate-search effort favored by other, quality-dependent ornaments. We further show that the potential to produce attractive male offspring ("sexy sons") can be as important as producing offspring of high general quality ("good genes") in shaping female preferences, even when preferred ornaments are quality dependent. Our model highlights the importance of mate-search effort as a driver of aesthetic coevolution.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0027-8424</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1091-6490</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2206262119</identifier><identifier>PMID: 35939704</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: National Academy of Sciences</publisher><subject>Animals ; Attraction ; Biological Evolution ; Biological Sciences ; Coevolution ; Evolution ; Female ; Females ; Fitness ; Genes ; Genetic Fitness ; Male ; Males ; Mating Preference, Animal ; Offspring ; Reproductive fitness ; Searching ; Sexual Selection</subject><ispartof>Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - PNAS, 2022-08, Vol.119 (33), p.e2206262119-e2206262119</ispartof><rights>Copyright National Academy of Sciences Aug 16, 2022</rights><rights>Copyright © 2022 the Author(s). Published by PNAS. 2022</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c421t-f14c83e6ef21b2c8466e1724731fff5d0b7393a4f26da7635b07c49b477359343</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c421t-f14c83e6ef21b2c8466e1724731fff5d0b7393a4f26da7635b07c49b477359343</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-7306-170X ; 0000-0003-0228-7124 ; 0000-0001-5560-6673</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9388091/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9388091/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,27924,27925,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35939704$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Henshaw, Jonathan M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fromhage, Lutz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jones, Adam G</creatorcontrib><title>The evolution of mating preferences for genetic attractiveness and quality in the presence of sensory bias</title><title>Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - PNAS</title><addtitle>Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A</addtitle><description>The aesthetic preferences of potential mates have driven the evolution of a baffling diversity of elaborate ornaments. Which fitness benefit-if any-choosers gain from expressing such preferences is controversial, however. Here, we simulate the evolution of preferences for multiple ornament types (e.g., "Fisherian," "handicap," and "indicator" ornaments) that differ in their associations with genes for attractiveness and other components of fitness. We model the costs of preference expression in a biologically plausible way, which decouples costly mate search from cost-free preferences. Ornaments of all types evolved in our model, but their occurrence was far from random. Females typically preferred ornaments that carried information about a male's quality, defined here as his ability to acquire and metabolize resources. Highly salient ornaments, which key into preexisting perceptual biases, were also more likely to evolve. When males expressed quality-dependent ornaments, females invested readily in costly mate search to locate preferred males. In contrast, the genetic benefits associated with purely arbitrary ornaments were insufficient to sustain highly costly mate search. Arbitrary ornaments could nonetheless "piggyback" on mate-search effort favored by other, quality-dependent ornaments. We further show that the potential to produce attractive male offspring ("sexy sons") can be as important as producing offspring of high general quality ("good genes") in shaping female preferences, even when preferred ornaments are quality dependent. Our model highlights the importance of mate-search effort as a driver of aesthetic coevolution.</description><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Attraction</subject><subject>Biological Evolution</subject><subject>Biological Sciences</subject><subject>Coevolution</subject><subject>Evolution</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Females</subject><subject>Fitness</subject><subject>Genes</subject><subject>Genetic Fitness</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Males</subject><subject>Mating Preference, Animal</subject><subject>Offspring</subject><subject>Reproductive fitness</subject><subject>Searching</subject><subject>Sexual Selection</subject><issn>0027-8424</issn><issn>1091-6490</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkc1LHDEYxoModbU9eysBL72MvvmYyeRSKGJVELzYc8hkkzXLbLImmYX9783gR1tPScjveXif90HojMAFAcEut0HnC0qhox0lRB6gBQFJmo5LOEQLACqanlN-jE5yXgOAbHv4go5ZK5kUwBdo_fhksd3FcSo-Bhwd3ujiwwpvk3U22WBsxi4mvLLBFm-wLiVpU_yuvnPGOizx86RHX_bYB1yqW1XmWTeb1UuOaY8Hr_NXdOT0mO23t_MU_fl9_Xh129w_3Nxd_bpvDKekNI5w0zPbWUfJQE3Pu84SQblgxDnXLmEQTDLNHe2WWnSsHUAYLgcuxByLs1P089V3Ow0buzQ21IlHtU1-o9NeRe3V_z_BP6lV3CnJ-r5urxr8eDNI8XmyuaiNz8aOow42TllRAcBIK6Ct6PkndB2nFGq8meIMeC9n6vKVMinmXBf7MQwBNfeo5h7V3x6r4vu_GT749-LYCw9AmuM</recordid><startdate>20220816</startdate><enddate>20220816</enddate><creator>Henshaw, Jonathan M</creator><creator>Fromhage, Lutz</creator><creator>Jones, Adam G</creator><general>National Academy of Sciences</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>7QR</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7TO</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7306-170X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0228-7124</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5560-6673</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20220816</creationdate><title>The evolution of mating preferences for genetic attractiveness and quality in the presence of sensory bias</title><author>Henshaw, Jonathan M ; Fromhage, Lutz ; Jones, Adam G</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c421t-f14c83e6ef21b2c8466e1724731fff5d0b7393a4f26da7635b07c49b477359343</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Attraction</topic><topic>Biological Evolution</topic><topic>Biological Sciences</topic><topic>Coevolution</topic><topic>Evolution</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Females</topic><topic>Fitness</topic><topic>Genes</topic><topic>Genetic Fitness</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Males</topic><topic>Mating Preference, Animal</topic><topic>Offspring</topic><topic>Reproductive fitness</topic><topic>Searching</topic><topic>Sexual Selection</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Henshaw, Jonathan M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fromhage, Lutz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jones, Adam G</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Calcium &amp; Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Chemoreception Abstracts</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Oncogenes and Growth Factors Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - PNAS</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Henshaw, Jonathan M</au><au>Fromhage, Lutz</au><au>Jones, Adam G</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The evolution of mating preferences for genetic attractiveness and quality in the presence of sensory bias</atitle><jtitle>Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - PNAS</jtitle><addtitle>Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A</addtitle><date>2022-08-16</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>119</volume><issue>33</issue><spage>e2206262119</spage><epage>e2206262119</epage><pages>e2206262119-e2206262119</pages><issn>0027-8424</issn><eissn>1091-6490</eissn><abstract>The aesthetic preferences of potential mates have driven the evolution of a baffling diversity of elaborate ornaments. Which fitness benefit-if any-choosers gain from expressing such preferences is controversial, however. Here, we simulate the evolution of preferences for multiple ornament types (e.g., "Fisherian," "handicap," and "indicator" ornaments) that differ in their associations with genes for attractiveness and other components of fitness. We model the costs of preference expression in a biologically plausible way, which decouples costly mate search from cost-free preferences. Ornaments of all types evolved in our model, but their occurrence was far from random. Females typically preferred ornaments that carried information about a male's quality, defined here as his ability to acquire and metabolize resources. Highly salient ornaments, which key into preexisting perceptual biases, were also more likely to evolve. When males expressed quality-dependent ornaments, females invested readily in costly mate search to locate preferred males. In contrast, the genetic benefits associated with purely arbitrary ornaments were insufficient to sustain highly costly mate search. Arbitrary ornaments could nonetheless "piggyback" on mate-search effort favored by other, quality-dependent ornaments. We further show that the potential to produce attractive male offspring ("sexy sons") can be as important as producing offspring of high general quality ("good genes") in shaping female preferences, even when preferred ornaments are quality dependent. Our model highlights the importance of mate-search effort as a driver of aesthetic coevolution.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>National Academy of Sciences</pub><pmid>35939704</pmid><doi>10.1073/pnas.2206262119</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7306-170X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0228-7124</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5560-6673</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0027-8424
ispartof Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences - PNAS, 2022-08, Vol.119 (33), p.e2206262119-e2206262119
issn 0027-8424
1091-6490
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9388091
source MEDLINE; PubMed Central; Alma/SFX Local Collection; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry
subjects Animals
Attraction
Biological Evolution
Biological Sciences
Coevolution
Evolution
Female
Females
Fitness
Genes
Genetic Fitness
Male
Males
Mating Preference, Animal
Offspring
Reproductive fitness
Searching
Sexual Selection
title The evolution of mating preferences for genetic attractiveness and quality in the presence of sensory bias
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-22T09%3A09%3A15IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20evolution%20of%20mating%20preferences%20for%20genetic%20attractiveness%20and%20quality%20in%20the%20presence%20of%20sensory%20bias&rft.jtitle=Proceedings%20of%20the%20National%20Academy%20of%20Sciences%20-%20PNAS&rft.au=Henshaw,%20Jonathan%20M&rft.date=2022-08-16&rft.volume=119&rft.issue=33&rft.spage=e2206262119&rft.epage=e2206262119&rft.pages=e2206262119-e2206262119&rft.issn=0027-8424&rft.eissn=1091-6490&rft_id=info:doi/10.1073/pnas.2206262119&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2700315705%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2704304895&rft_id=info:pmid/35939704&rfr_iscdi=true