Skip to main content
PMC home page
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences logoLink to Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
. 2004 Jul 7;271(1546):1377–1384. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2004.2741

Elevated testosterone reduces choosiness in female dark-eyed juncos (Junco hyemalis): evidence for a hormonal constraint on sexual selection?

Joel W McGlothlin 1, Diane L H Neudorf 1, Joseph M Casto 1, Val Nolan Jr 1, Ellen D Ketterson 1
PMCID: PMC1691732  PMID: 15306336

Abstract

Because testosterone (T) often mediates the expression of attractive displays and ornaments, in the absence of constraints sexual selection should lead to an evolutionary increase in male T levels. One candidate constraint would be a genetic correlation between the sexes that leads to a correlated response in females. If increased T in females were to have deleterious effects on mate choice, the effect of sexual selection on male T would be weakened. Using female dark-eyed juncos (Junco hyemalis), we tested whether experimentally enhancing female T would lead to a decrease in discrimination between two classes of males, one treated with T (T-males) and one control (C-males). The two female treatments (T-implanted and C-females) spent equal amounts of time with both classes of males, but T-treated females failed to show a preference for either male treatment, whereas C-females showed a significant preference, albeit in an unexpected direction (for C-males). T-females were less discriminating than C-females, irrespective of the direction of their preference. To our knowledge, this is the first study to show that circulating hormones can alter female choosiness without reducing sexual motivation. Our results suggest that hormonal correlations between the sexes have the potential to constrain sexual selection on males.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (125.7 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Adkins-Regan E. Testosterone increases singing and aggression but not male-typical sexual partner preference in early estrogen treated female zebra finches. Horm Behav. 1999 Feb;35(1):63–70. doi: 10.1006/hbeh.1998.1497. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Fusani L, Beani L, Lupo C, Dessì-fulgheri F. Sexually selected vigilance behaviour of the grey partridge is affected by plasma androgen levels. Anim Behav. 1997 Oct;54(4):1013–1018. doi: 10.1006/anbe.1997.0518. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Jennions M. D., Petrie M. Variation in mate choice and mating preferences: a review of causes and consequences. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 1997 May;72(2):283–327. doi: 10.1017/s0006323196005014. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Ketterson E. D., Nolan V., Jr, Wolf L., Ziegenfus C., Dufty A. M., Jr, Ball G. F., Johnsen T. S. Testosterone and avian life histories: the effect of experimentally elevated testosterone on corticosterone and body mass in dark-eyed juncos. Horm Behav. 1991 Dec;25(4):489–503. doi: 10.1016/0018-506x(91)90016-b. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Lande R., Arnold S. J. Evolution of mating preference and sexual dimorphism. J Theor Biol. 1985 Dec 21;117(4):651–664. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5193(85)80245-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Lande R. Models of speciation by sexual selection on polygenic traits. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1981 Jun;78(6):3721–3725. doi: 10.1073/pnas.78.6.3721. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Langmore N. E., Cockrem J. F., Candy E. J. Competition for male reproductive investment elevates testosterone levels in female dunnocks, Prunella modularis. Proc Biol Sci. 2002 Dec 7;269(1508):2473–2478. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2002.2167. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Nespor A. A., Lukazewicz M. J., Dooling R. J., Ball G. F. Testosterone induction of male-like vocalizations in female budgerigars (Melopsittacus undulatus). Horm Behav. 1996 Jun;30(2):162–169. doi: 10.1006/hbeh.1996.0020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Owens I. P., Thompson D. B. Sex differences, sex ratios and sex roles. Proc Biol Sci. 1994 Nov 22;258(1352):93–99. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1994.0148. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1997.0223. [DOI] [PMC free article] [Google Scholar]
  11. Price D. K., Burley N. T. Constraints on the evolution of attractive traits: genetic (co)variance of zebra finch bill colour. Heredity (Edinb) 1993 Oct;71(Pt 4):405–412. doi: 10.1038/hdy.1993.155. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Qvarnström A., Pärt T., Sheldon B. C. Adaptive plasticity in mate preference linked to differences in reproductive effort. Nature. 2000 May 18;405(6784):344–347. doi: 10.1038/35012605. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Staub N. L., De Beer M. The role of androgens in female vertebrates. Gen Comp Endocrinol. 1997 Oct;108(1):1–24. doi: 10.1006/gcen.1997.6962. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Widemo F, Sæther SA. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder: causes and consequences of variation in mating preferences. Trends Ecol Evol. 1999 Jan;14(1):26–31. doi: 10.1016/s0169-5347(98)01531-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Wingfield J. C., Farner D. S. The determination of five steroids in avian plasma by radioimmunoassay and competitive protein-binding. Steroids. 1975 Sep;26(3):311–321. doi: 10.1016/0039-128x(75)90077-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences are provided here courtesy of The Royal Society

RESOURCES