Evolution of sexual cooperation from sexual conflict.
cooperation
differential allocation
sensory bias
sexual conflict
sexual stimulation
Journal
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
ISSN: 1091-6490
Titre abrégé: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7505876
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 11 2019
12 11 2019
Historique:
pubmed:
16
10
2019
medline:
2
4
2020
entrez:
16
10
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
In many species that form pair bonds, males display to their mate after pair formation. These displays elevate the female's investment into the brood. This is a form of cooperation because without the display, female investment is reduced to levels that are suboptimal for both sexes. The presence of such displays is paradoxical as in their absence the male should be able to invest extra resources directly into offspring, to the benefit of both sexes. We consider that the origin of these displays lies in the exploitation of preexisting perceptual biases which increase female investment beyond that which is optimal for her, initially resulting in a sexual conflict. We use a combined population genetic and quantitative genetic model to show how this conflict becomes resolved into sexual cooperation. A cooperative outcome is most likely when perceptual biases are under selection pressures in other contexts (e.g., detection of predators, prey, or conspecifics), but this is not required. Cooperation between pair members can regularly evolve even when this provides no net advantage to the pair and when the display itself reduces a male's contributions to raising the brood. The findings account for many interactions between the sexes that have been difficult to explain in the context of sexual selection.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31611370
pii: 1904138116
doi: 10.1073/pnas.1904138116
pmc: PMC6859360
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
23225-23231Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare no competing interest.
Références
Am Nat. 2017 Oct;190(4):534-546
pubmed: 28937815
Proc Biol Sci. 2018 Aug 1;285(1884):
pubmed: 30068679
Proc Biol Sci. 2012 Jan 7;279(1726):163-70
pubmed: 21632630
Proc Biol Sci. 2002 Mar 7;269(1490):475-81
pubmed: 11886639
J Evol Biol. 2007 Mar;20(2):415-32
pubmed: 17305808
Horm Behav. 2008 Jan;53(1):1-10
pubmed: 17916360
Horm Behav. 2016 Apr;80:39-46
pubmed: 26836771
Oecologia. 1988 May;75(4):601-607
pubmed: 28312437
Zoo Biol. 2012 Jan-Feb;31(1):71-81
pubmed: 21812021
Genetica. 2002 Nov;116(2-3):311-27
pubmed: 12555787
Evolution. 1998 Feb;52(1):1-7
pubmed: 28568154
Curr Biol. 2012 Aug 7;22(15):1440-3
pubmed: 22795697
Trends Ecol Evol. 2000 Oct 1;15(10):397-402
pubmed: 10998516
R Soc Open Sci. 2016 Mar 02;3(3):160027
pubmed: 27069668
Science. 2006 Feb 17;311(5763):965-9
pubmed: 16484485
J Theor Biol. 1990 Jun 21;144(4):517-46
pubmed: 2402153
J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1964 Oct;58:164-6
pubmed: 14215384
Proc Biol Sci. 2014 Jan 29;281(1779):20131981
pubmed: 24478292
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2009 Apr 27;364(1520):1039-48
pubmed: 19324609
Proc Biol Sci. 2013 Feb 20;280(1757):20123020
pubmed: 23427172
Trends Ecol Evol. 1998 Oct 1;13(10):415-20
pubmed: 21238370
Horm Behav. 2000 May;37(3):179-89
pubmed: 10868481
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1995 May 30;348(1325):355-61
pubmed: 8577830