Access
To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
Brief Communications Arising
Nature 444, E16-E17 (14 December 2006) | doi:10.1038/nature05502; Published online 13 December 2006
Evolutionary genetics: Evolution of mate choice in the wild (Reply)
Anna Qvarnström1, Jon E. Brommer2 & Lars Gustafsson1
Abstract
Replying to Postma, Griffith and Brooks
We have shown1that there is little scope for selection on male flycatchers' forehead patch size to drive the evolution of female choice for this ornament indirectly. Postma et al.2question this conclusion, arguing that a female's social partner (that is, realized mate choice) is not a good estimate of her preference, and that our estimates are biased because we do not take patterns of extra-pair paternity into account. However, indirect sexual selection can only operate through realized mate choice, and extra-pair copulations are associated with larger costs than indirect benefits.
To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
MORE ARTICLES LIKE THIS
These links to content published by NPG are automatically generated.
RESEARCH
Testing the genetics underlying the co-evolution of mate choice and ornament in the wildNature Letters to Editor (04 May 2006)
Evolutionary genetics Evolution of mate choice in the wildNature Brief Communication (14 Dec 2006)
Trade-offs between life-history traits and a secondary sexual character in male collared flycatchersNature Letters to Editor (25 May 1995)