Abstract
The sexual selection literature has grown rapidly in recent years. In an effort to elucidate biases in the focus of current mate-choice research here, I review 297 studies among 230 species. Among taxa, studies of birds were most common (40% of all studies), with insects, fishes, and anurans less well represented (20%, 18%, 14%, respectively). All other taxa were poorly represented in the literature (<3%). Across sensory modalities, studies of visual and acoustic signals were most common (46%, 30%, respectively), with relatively few studies investigating chemical, tactile, and electrical signals in mate choice (3%, 3%, <1%, respectively). Most mate-choice studies of birds and fishes investigated visual signals, while the majority of insect and anuran studies investigated acoustic signals. While these associations may reflect biological realities—birds and anurans tend not to emphasize chemical cues in mate choice; electric communication may indeed be quite uncommon—they may also be grossly misleading: chemical cues are likely critical for mate choice in millions of insect species. Moreover, I suggest that the particularly high vulnerability of chemical communication networks to anthropogenic fouling should provide immediate motivation for many more studies of chemical signals in mate choice. Finally, I find that despite widespread acceptance that male displays are often comprised of multiple elements produced across sensory modalities, studies simultaneously investigating the use of multiple cues in mate choice are rare. While not exhaustive, this review identifies biases in the focus of mate-choice studies, and should serve to identify fruitful directions for future mate-choice research.
References
Andersson M (1994) Sexual selection. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Candolin U (2003) The use of multiple cues in mate choice. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 78:575–595. doi:10.1017/S1464793103006158
Coleman SW (2005) Variable female preferences and the evolution of complex male displays. Doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park, USA.
Coleman SW, Patricelli GL, Borgia G (2004) Variable female preferences and the evolution of complex male displays. Nature 428:742–745. doi:10.1038/nature02419
Cronin H (1991) The ant and the peacock. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Darwin C (1871) The descent of man and selection in relation to sex. Murray, London
Fisher HS, Wong BBM, Rosenthal GG (2006) Alteration of the chemical environment disrupts communication in a freshwater fish. Proc R Soc Lon Ser B 273:1187–1193. doi:10.1098/rspb.2005.3406
Hamilton PS, Sullivan BK (2005) Female mate attraction in ornate tree lizards, Urosaurus ornatus: a multivariate analysis. Anim Behav 69:219–224. doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2004.03.011
Hebets EA (2005) Attention-altering interaction in the multimodal courtship display of the wolf spider Schizocosa uetzi. Behav Ecol 16:75–82. doi:10.1093/beheco/arh133
Hebets EA, Uetz GW (1999) Female responses to isolated signals from multimodal male courtship displays in the wolf spider genus Schizocosa (Araneae: Lycosidae). Anim Behav 57:865–872. doi:10.1006/anbe.1998.1048
Hebets EA, Papaj DR (2005) Complex signal function: developing a framework of testable hypotheses. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 57:197–214. doi:10.1007/s00265-004-0865-7
Huxley J (1942) Evolution: the modern synthesis. Allen & Unwin, London
Maddison W, Hedin M (2003) Phylogeny of Habronattus jumping spiders (Araneae: Salticidae), with consideration of genital and courtship evolution. Sys Ent 28:1–21. doi:10.1046/j.1365-3113.2003.00195.x
Møller AP, Jennions MD (2001) Testing and adjusting for publication bias. Trends Ecol Evol 16:580–586. doi:10.1016/S0169-5347(01)02235-2
Olsson M, Madsen T (1995) Female choice on male quantitative traits in lizards: why is it so rare? Behav Ecol Sociobiol 36:179–184. doi:10.1007/BF00177794
Patricelli GL, Uy JAC, Walsh G, Borgia G (2002) Sexual selection: male displays adjusted to female’s response. Nature 415:279–280. doi:10.1038/415279a
Phelps SM, Ryan MJ, Rand AS (2001) Vestigial preference functions in neural networks and Túngara frogs. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98:13161–13166. doi:10.1073/pnas.231296998
Ryan MJ, Rand AS (1995) Female responses to ancestral advertisement calls in the Túngara frog. Science 269:390–392. doi:10.1126/science.269.5222.390
Ryan MJ, Fox JH, Wilczynski W, Rand AS (1990) Sexual selection for sensory exploitation in the frog Physalaemus pustulosus. Nature 343:66–67. doi:10.1038/343066a0
Tokarz RR (1995) Mate choice in lizards: a review. Herp Mono 9:17–40. doi:10.2307/1466994
Wyatt TD (2003) Pheromones and animal behavior: communication by smell and taste. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts
Acknowledgement
I thank G.G. Rosenthal for valuable comments on the manuscript. S.W.C. is supported by an individual postdoctoral National Research Service Award from the National Institutes of Health, USA.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Communicated by I. Schlupp
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Supplementary Table 1
(DOC 399 KB)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Coleman, S.W. Taxonomic and sensory biases in the mate-choice literature: there are far too few studies of chemical and multimodal communication. acta ethol 12, 45–48 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10211-008-0050-5
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10211-008-0050-5