Abstract
Several studies have shown female preference for conspecific males with the attached artificial ornaments of more elaborate heterospecifics. However, preference for heterospecifics under natural conditions is relatively rare. We tested what factors affect behavioural mechanisms of species isolation using three species of estrildid finch (genus Uraeginthus) that occur in both sympatry and allopatry. These finches differ in degree of sexual dimorphism; male ornamentation; behavioural and morphological similarity; and phylogenetic distance. Paired mate-choice trials were used in which females were presented with a conspecific and heterospecific male to test which of the above between-species differences best predicted the degree of premating isolation. The three species differed in the degree of species-specific mate preference shown. Females from the brighter two species discriminated against dull males, independently of sympatry-allopatry, similarity and phylogenetic distance. Females from the dull species reacted to conspecific males and brighter heterospecific males equally strongly, independently of similarity and phylogenetic distance. In contrast to previous studies, an equal preference for heterospecific and conspecific males was found under natural conditions. It is suggested that differences between closely related species in male ornamentation affect the likelihood that premating isolation will occur due to the fact that sexual selection tends to drive preferences for exaggerated ornamentation.
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (158.2 KB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Basolo A. L. Evolutionary change in a receiver bias: a comparison of female preference functions. Proc Biol Sci. 1998 Nov 22;265(1411):2223–2228. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1998.0563. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Basolo A. L. Female preference predates the evolution of the sword in swordtail fish. Science. 1990 Nov 9;250(4982):808–810. doi: 10.1126/science.250.4982.808. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Grant P. R., Grant B. R. Hybridization of bird species. Science. 1992 Apr 10;256(5054):193–197. doi: 10.1126/science.256.5054.193. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Kirkpatrick M. Reinforcement and divergence under assortative mating. Proc Biol Sci. 2000 Aug 22;267(1453):1649–1655. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2000.1191. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- MÁrquez R, Bosch J. Male advertisement call and female preference in sympatric and allopatric midwife toads. Anim Behav. 1997 Dec;54(6):1333–1345. doi: 10.1006/anbe.1997.0529. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Noor M. A. Reinforcement and other consequences of sympatry. Heredity (Edinb) 1999 Nov;83(Pt 5):503–508. doi: 10.1038/sj.hdy.6886320. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Noor M. A. Speciation driven by natural selection in Drosophila. Nature. 1995 Jun 22;375(6533):674–675. doi: 10.1038/375674a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- doi: 10.1098/rspb.1998.0497. [DOI] [PMC free article] [Google Scholar]
- Ryan M. J., Fox J. H., Wilczynski W., Rand A. S. Sexual selection for sensory exploitation in the frog Physalaemus pustulosus. Nature. 1990 Jan 4;343(6253):66–67. doi: 10.1038/343066a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Ryan M. J., Wagner W. E., Jr Asymmetries in mating preferences between species: female swordtails prefer heterospecific males. Science. 1987 May 1;236(4801):595–597. doi: 10.1126/science.236.4801.595. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Servedio M. R. Reinforcement and the genetics of nonrandom mating. Evolution. 2000 Feb;54(1):21–29. doi: 10.1111/j.0014-3820.2000.tb00003.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- de Kort Selvino R., ten Cate Carel. Response to interspecific vocalizations is affected by degree of phylogenetic relatedness in Streptopelia doves. Anim Behav. 2001 Jan;61(1):239–247. doi: 10.1006/anbe.2000.1552. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]