Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Letter
  • Published:

Environmental determination of a sexually selected trait

Abstract

Models of sexual selection usually assume that variation in the expression of sexual ornaments is determined largely by genetic, rather than environmental, factors1. However, empirical support for this assumption comes from studies of species with little parental care1,2, in which the influence of environmental factors may be limited3,4, and from studies of just two species5,6 with parental care, in both of which heritability estimates vary hugely between years or populations7,8. In the remaining studies of species with parental care, it is not known whether resemblance in sexual ornamentation between relatives was due to shared genes or shared patterns of care3,4,9,10,11,12,13,14,15. Here we use cross-fostering experiments in house sparrows, Passer domesticus, to examine the relative roles of these effects. We demonstrate that, although sons resemble their fathers with respect to sexual ornamentation, this resemblance is mainly due to post-hatching environmental effects rather than shared genes. We also show that sons hatching early in the year have the largest ornaments. These results support models that emphasize the importance of environmental sources of variation16,17,18, such as direct paternal effects4,19,20, on the expression of sexual ornaments, and agree with the general observation that sexually selected traits tend to be condition dependent1. We urge the incorporation of gene–environment interactions into future models of sexual selection.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Correlations between the badge size of male offspring and the badge size of genetic and foster fathers.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Andersson, M. Sexual Selection (Princeton Univ. Press, 1994).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Pomiankowski, A. & Møller, A. P. Aresolution to the lek paradox. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 260, 21–29 (1995).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  3. Lynch, M. & Walsh, B. Genetics and Analysis of Quantitative Traits (Sinauer, Sunderland, Massachusetts, 1998).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Price, T. in Maternal Effects as Adaptations (eds Mousseau, T. A. & Fox, C. W.) 202–226 (Oxford University Press, 1998).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Norris, K. Heritable variation in a plumage indicator of viability in male great tits Parus major. Nature 362, 537–539 (1993).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  6. Sheldon, B. C., Merilä, J., Qvarnström, A., Gustafsson, L. & Ellegren, H. Paternal genetic contribution to offspring condition predicted by size of male secondary sexual character. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 264, 297–302 (1997).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  7. Lemel, J. Evolutionary and Ecological Perspectives of Status Signalling in the Great Tit (Parus major L.). Thesis, Göteborgs Univ., Sweden(1993).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Qvarnström, A. Genotype-by-environment interactions in the determination of the size of a secondary sexual character in the collared flycatcher (Ficedula albicollis). Evolution(in the press).

  9. Boag, P. T. The heritability of external morphology in Darwin's ground finch (Geospiza) on Isla Daphne Major, Galapagos. Evolution 37, 877–894 (1983).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Møller, A. P. Natural and sexual selection on a plumage signal of status and on morphology in house sparrows, Passer domesticus. J. Evol. Biol. 2, 125–140 (1989).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Grant, P. R. The significance of subadult plumage in Darwin's finches Geospiza fortis. Behav. Ecol. 1, 161–170 (1990).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hill, G. E. Plumage coloration is a sexually selected indicator of male quality. Nature 350, 337–339 (1991).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  13. Møller, A. P. 1991 Sexual selection in the barn swallow Hirundo rustica. I. Determinants of ornament size. Evolution 45, 1823–1836 (1991).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lundberg, A. & Alatalo, R. V. The Pied Flycatcher (Poyser, London, 1993).

    Google Scholar 

  15. Williams, J. D., Kruegar, J. E. & Harmel, D. H. Heritabilities for antler characteristics and body weight in yearling white-tailed deer. Heredity 73, 78–83 (1994).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Andersson, M. Evolution of condition-dependent sex ornaments and mating preferences: sexual selection based on viability differences. Evolution 40, 804–816 (1986).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Rowe, L. & Houle, D. The lek paradox and the capture of genetic variation by condition dependence. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 263, 1415–1421 (1996).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  18. Iwasa, Y. & Pomiankowski, A. Good parent and good gene models of handicap evolution. J. Theor. Biol.(in the press).

  19. Price, T., Schluter, D. & Heckman, N. E. Sexual selection when the female directly benefits. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 48, 187–211 (1993).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Wolf, J. B., Moore, A. J. & Brodie, E. D. The evolution of indicator traits for parental quality: the role of maternal and paternal effects. Am. Nat. 150, 639–649 (1997).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Griffith, S. C., Stewart, I. R. K., Dawson, D. A., Owens, I. P. F. & Burke, T. Contrasting levels of extra-pair paternity in mainland and island populations of the house sparrow: is there an ‘island effect’? Biol. J. Linn. Soc.(in the press).

  22. Veiga, J. P. Badge size, phenotypic quality, and reproductive success in the house sparrow. Evolution 47, 1161–1170 (1993).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Møller, A. P. Social control of deception among status signalling house sparrows Passer domesticus. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 20, 307–311 (1987).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Møller, A. P. Variation in badge size in male house sparrows Passer domesticus: evidence for status signalling. Anim. Behav. 35, 1637–1644 (1987).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Møller, A. P. Badge size in the house sparrow Passer domesticus: effects of intra- and intersexual selection. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 22, 373–378 (1988).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Møller, A. P. Frequency of female copulations with multiple males and sexual competition. Am. Nat. 139, 1089–1101 (1992).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Veiga, J. P. & Puerta, P. Nutritional constraints determine the expression of a sexual trait in the house sparrow, Passer domesticus. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 263, 229–234 (1996).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  28. Hoffmann, A. A. & Merila, J. Heritable variation and evolution under favourable and unfavourable conditions. Trends Ecol. Evol. 14, 96–101 (1999).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank NERC (UK) for support and the Landmark Trust for permission to work on Lundy; B. Sheldon for help and advice; the Department of Animal Ecology, Uppsala University for support to S.C.G.; the Department of Zoology, University of Oxford for sabbatical hospitality to I.P.F.O; D. Dawson, I. Hartley, A. Møller, A. Pomiankowski, D. Richardson, D. Ross and I. Stewart for help and discussion; and R. Alatalo, M. Andersson, P. Harvey, J. Merila, K. Norris, J. Pemberton, A. Pomiankowski, T. Price and A. Qvarnström for comments on the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Simon C. Griffith.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Griffith, S., Owens, I. & Burke, T. Environmental determination of a sexually selected trait. Nature 400, 358–360 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1038/22536

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/22536

This article is cited by

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing