Abstract
Recent developments in sexual selection theory suggest that on their own, mate preferences can promote the maintenance of sexual trait diversity. However, how mate preferences constrain the permissiveness of sexual trait diversity in different environmental regimes remains an open question. Here, we examine how a range of mate choice parameters affect the permissiveness of sexual trait polymorphism under several selection regimes. We use the null model of sexual selection and show that environments with strong assortative mating significantly increase the permissiveness of sexual trait polymorphism. We show that for a given change in mate choice parameters, the permissiveness of polymorphism changes more in environments with strong natural selection on sexual traits than in environments with weak selection. Sets of nearly stable polymorphic populations with weak assortative mating are more likely to show accidental divergence in sexual traits than sets of populations with strong assortative mating. The permissiveness of sexual trait polymorphism critically depends upon particular combinations of natural selection and mate choice parameters.
Highlights
Substantial variation is recorded in sexually selected traits within species (Brooks & Endler, 2001; Gray & McKinnon, 2007; Pomiankowski & Møller, 1995; Wellenreuther, Svensson, & Hansson, 2014)
Recent developments in sexual selection theory suggest that on their own, mate preferences can promote the maintenance of sexual trait diversity and promote coexistence (M’Gonigle et al, 2012)
How mate preferences constrain the maintenance of sexual trait diversity in different environmental regimes remains an open question
Summary
Substantial variation is recorded in sexually selected traits within species (Brooks & Endler, 2001; Gray & McKinnon, 2007; Pomiankowski & Møller, 1995; Wellenreuther, Svensson, & Hansson, 2014). The stable line of equilibria disappears and collapses to a single equilibrium point when mate preferences are under even weak directional selection (Grafen, 1990; Kirkpatrick & Ryan, 1991; Prum, 2010). Kirkpatrick’s haploid version of the null model of sexual selection (Kirkpatrick, 1982) and subsequent models expanding Kirkpatrick’s original model (Bulmer, 1989; Seger, 1985; Seger & Trivers, 1986; Takahasi, 1997) analyze the effects of mate preference strengths on the shape and stability of the equilibrium line. We use Kirkpatrick’s model and focus on how mate preferences affect the size and shape of the attraction basin around the stable line of equilibria. In the first set of models, the sexual trait is only affected by selective mating, whereas, in the second, directional viability selection affects the sexual trait
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
