Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 34, Issue 6, pp 443–449 | Cite as

Sexual selection and the evolutionary effects of copying mate choice

  • Mark Kirkpatrick
  • Lee Alan Dugatkin


We examine the evolutionary consequences of copying mate choice using models in which the preferences of younger females are affected by the mate choices that they observe older females making. We introduce two models of copying, termed “single mate copying” and “mass copying”, corresponding to situations in which immature females imprint on the choices of only one or of a very large number of older females, respectively. Female mating preferences are assumed to evolve only through cultural evolution, while the male trait on which they act is inherited either via a haploid autosomal or a Y-linked locus. Results show that the preference and male trait can rapidly coevolve, with a positive frequencey-dependent advantage to the more common male trait allele. This process can cause a display trait that lowers male viability to increase in a population. Mass copying results in stronger frequency dependence than does single mate copying. Mass copying and, under some conditions, single mate copying lead to two alterative stable equilibria for the male trait. Neither copying model supports variation at the male trait locus, and copying makes it more difficult for a novel male trait phenotype to spread.

Key words

Copying Mete choice Sexual selection Social learning 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aoki K (1989) A sexual-selection model for the evolution of imitative learning of song in polygynous birds. Am Nat 134:599–612Google Scholar
  2. Bikhchandani S, Hirschleifer D, Welch I (1992) A theory of fads, fashion, custom and cultural change as informational cascades. J Politic Econ 100:992–1026Google Scholar
  3. Boyd R, Richerson PJ (1985) Culture and the evolutionary process. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  4. Boyd R, Richerson PJ (1988) An evolutionary model of social learning: the effects of spatial and temporal variation. In: Zentall TR, Galef BG (eds) Social learning: psychological and biological perspectives. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale NJ, pp 29–48Google Scholar
  5. Boyd R, Richerson PJ (1989) Social learning as an adaptation. In: Some mathematical questions in biology: models in population biology. Lectures on mathematics in the life sciences, vol 20, pp 1–26Google Scholar
  6. Bradbury JW, Gibson R (1983) Leks and mate choice. In: Bateson P (ed) Mate choice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 109–138Google Scholar
  7. Bradbury J, Vehrencamp S, Gibson R (1985) Leks and the unanimity of mate choice. In: Greenwood PJ, Harvey PH, Slatkin M (eds) Evolution: essays in honour of John Maynard Smith. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 301–314Google Scholar
  8. Breden F, Stoner G (1987) Male predation risk determines female preference in the Trinidad guppy. Nature 329:831–833Google Scholar
  9. Cavalli-Sforza LL, Feldman MW (1981) Cultural transmission and evolution: a quantitative approach. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  10. Curtsinger JW, Heisler IL (1988) A diploid “sexy son” model. Am Nat 132:437–453Google Scholar
  11. Dugatkin LA (1992) Sexual selection and imitation: females copy the mate choice of others. Am Nat 139:1384–1389Google Scholar
  12. Dugatkin LA, Godin J-G (1992) Reversal of female mate choice by copying. Proc R Soc London B 249:179–184Google Scholar
  13. Dugatkin LA, Godin J-G (1993) Sexual selection and female copying: age dependent effects. Behav Ecol 4:289–292Google Scholar
  14. Endler J (1980) Natural selection on color patterns in Poecilia reticulata. Evolution 34:76–91Google Scholar
  15. Endler JA (1983) Natural and sexual selection on color patterns in Poeciliid fishes. Environ Biol Fish 9:173–190Google Scholar
  16. Frank SA (1990) When to copy or void an opponent's strategy. J Theor Biol 145:41–46Google Scholar
  17. Gibson RM, Bachman GC (1992) The costs of female choice in a lekking bird. Behav Ecol 3:300–309Google Scholar
  18. Gibson RM, Hoglund J (1992) Copying and sexual selection. Trends Ecol Evol 7:229–232Google Scholar
  19. Gomulkiewicz R, Hastings A (1990) Ploidy and evolution by sexual selection: a comparison of haploid and diploid female choice models near fixation equilibria. Evolution 44:757–770Google Scholar
  20. Haskins C, Haskins E, McLaughin J, Hewitt R (1961) Polymorphism and population structure in Lebistes reticulatus, a population study. In: Blair W (ed) Vertebrate speciation. University of Texas Press, Austin, pp 320–395Google Scholar
  21. Houde AE (1987) Mate choice based upon naturally occurring color-pattern variation in a guppy population. Evolution 41:110Google Scholar
  22. Houde AE (1988) Genetic difference in female choice between two guppy populations. Anim Behav 36:510–516Google Scholar
  23. Houde AE, Endler J (1990) Correlated evolution of female mating preference and male color pattern in the guppy, Poecilia reticulata. Science 248:1405–1408Google Scholar
  24. Kirkpatrick M (1982) Sexual selection and the evolution of female choice. Evolution 36:1–12Google Scholar
  25. Kirkpatrick M (1987) Sexual selection by female choice in polygynous animals. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 18:43–70Google Scholar
  26. Kirkpatrick M, Ryan MJ (1991) The evolution of female mating preferences and the paradox of the lek. Nature 350:33–38Google Scholar
  27. Laland KN (1994a) On the evolutionary consequences of sexual imprinting. Evolution (in press)Google Scholar
  28. Laland KN (1994b) Sexual selection with a culturally transmitted mating preference. Theor Popul Biol (in press)Google Scholar
  29. Lande R (1981) Models of speciation by sexual selection on polygenic traits. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA 78:3721–3725Google Scholar
  30. Lill A (1974) Sexual behavior of the lek-forming white-bearded manakin (Manacus manacus trinitatis Hartert). Z Tierpsychol 36:1–36Google Scholar
  31. Losey GS Jr, Stanton FG, Telecky TM, Tyler WA III, Zoology 691 graduate seminar class (1986) Copying others, an evolutionarily stable strategy for mate choice: a model. Am Nat 128:653–664Google Scholar
  32. O'Donald P (1980) Genetic models of sexual selection. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  33. Otto SP (1991) On evolution under sexual and viability selection: a two-locus diploid model. Evolution 45:1443–1457Google Scholar
  34. Parker GA (1983) Mate quality and mating decisions. In: Bateson P (ed) Mate choice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 141–166Google Scholar
  35. Pomiankowski A (1987) The costs of choice in sexual selection. J Theor Biol 128:195–218Google Scholar
  36. Pomiankowski A (1988) The evolution of female mate preferences for male genetic quality. Oxford Surv Evol Biol 5:136–184Google Scholar
  37. Pruett-Jones S (1992) Independent versus non-independent mate choice: Do females copy each other? Am Nat 140:1000–1009Google Scholar
  38. Richerson PJ, Boyd R (1989) The role of evolved predispositions in cultural evolution, or, human sociobiology meets Pascal's wager. Ethol Sociobiol 10:195–219Google Scholar
  39. Real L (1990) Search theory and mate choice. I. Models of single-sex discrimination. Am Nat 136:376–404Google Scholar
  40. Romanes G (1884) Animal intelligence. Appelton, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  41. Ryan MJ (1990) Sexual selection, sensory systems and sensory exploitation. Oxford Surv Evol Biol 7:157–195Google Scholar
  42. Schlupp I, Marler C, Ryan MJ (1994) Benefit to male sailfin mollies of mating with heterospecific females. Science 263:373–374Google Scholar
  43. Seger J (1985) Unifying genetic models for the evolution of female choice. Evolution 39:1185–1193Google Scholar
  44. Stoner G, Breden F (1988) Phenotypic differentiation in female preference related to geographic variation in male predation risk in the Trinidad guppy (Poecilia reticulata). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 22:285–291Google Scholar
  45. Wade MJ, Pruett-Jones SG (1990) Female copying increases the variance in male mating success. Proc Nat Acad Sciences USA 87:5749–5753Google Scholar
  46. Winge O (1927) The location of eighteen genes in Lebistes reticulatus. J Genetics 18:1–43Google Scholar
  47. Wolfram S (1991) Mathematica: a system for doing mathematics by computer. Addison-Wesley, Redwood CityGoogle Scholar
  48. Zentall TR, Galeff BG (1988) Social learning: psychological and biological perspectives. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale NJGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mark Kirkpatrick
    • 1
  • Lee Alan Dugatkin
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of ZoologyUniversity of TexasAustinUSA
  2. 2.Center for Evolutionary Ecology, TH Morgan School of Biological SciencesUniversity of KentuckyLexingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations