Evolution of sex-specific pace-of-life syndromes: causes and consequences
Males and females commonly differ in their life history optima and, consequently, in the optimal expression of life history, behavioral and physiological traits involved in pace-of-life syndromes (POLS). Sex differences in mean trait expression typically result if males and females exhibit different fitness optima along the same pace-of-life continuum, but the syndrome structure may also differ for the sexes. Due to sex-specific selective pressures imposed by reproductive roles and breeding strategies, the sexes may come to differ in the strength of correlation among traits, or different traits may covary in males and females. Ignorance of these selective forces operating between and within the sexes may lead to flawed conclusions about POLS manifestation in the species, and stand in the way of understanding the evolution, maintenance, and variability of POLS. We outline ways in which natural and sexual selection influence sex-specific trait evolution, and describe potential ultimate mechanisms underlying sex-specific POLS. We make predictions on how reproductive roles and the underlying sexual conflict lead to sex-specific trait covariances. These predictions lead us to conclude that sexual dimorphism in POLS is expected to be highly prevalent, allow us to assess possible consequences for POLS evolution, and provide guidelines for future studies.
KeywordsIntegrated phenotype Life history Mating system Personality POLS Sexual dimorphism
We thank the guest editors Niels Dingemanse, Melanie Dammhahn, Petri Niemelä, and Denis Réale for organizing the POLS workshops and this Topical Collection, the VW Foundation for funding the workshops, and all workshop participants for fruitful discussions. Insightful feedback from the guest editors, David Fisher, and anonymous reviewers helped improve the paper. We acknowledge financial support from Research Council of Norway (SFF-III 223257) to MT, European Research Council (AdG-294333, grant to Göran Arnqvist) to EI, and the Alberta Biodiversity Conservation Chair to AH.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- Clutton-Brock TH (1991) The evolution of parental care. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
- Immonen E, Hämäläinen A, Schuett W, Tarka M (2018) Evolution of sex-specific pace-of-life syndromes: genetic architecture and physiological mechanisms. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-018-2462-1
- Lorch PD, Proulx S, Rowe L, Day T (2003) Condition-dependent sexual selection can accelerate adaptation. Evol Ecol Res 5:867–881Google Scholar
- Lüpold S, Jin L, Liao W B (2017) Population density and structure drive differential investment in pre-and postmating sexual traits in frogs. Evolution (published online, https://doi.org/10.1111/evo.13246)
- Reynolds JD (2003) Life histories and extinction risk. In: Blackburn TM, Kevin JG (eds) Macroecology: concepts and consequences. 43rd symposium of the British Ecological Society, Vol. 43. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 195–217Google Scholar
- Royauté R, Berdal MA, Garrison CR, Dochtermann NA (2018) Paceless life? A meta-analysis of the pace-of-life syndrome hypothesis. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-018-2472-z
- Stearns SC (1992) The evolution of life histories. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- Tarka M, Guenther A, Niemelä PT, Nakagawa S, Noble DWA (2018) Sex differences in life-history, behavior and physiology along a slow-fast continuum: a meta-analysis. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. (in press)Google Scholar
- Trivers R (1972) Parental investment and sexual selection. In: Campbell B (ed) Sexual selection and the descent of man, 1871–1971. Aldine de Gruyter, New York, pp 136–179Google Scholar
- Williams GC (1975) Sex and evolution. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar