Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Mate choice for genetic quality when environments vary: suggestions for empirical progress

  • Published:
Genetica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Mate choice for good-genes remains one of the most controversial evolutionary processes ever proposed. This is partly because strong directional choice should theoretically deplete the genetic variation that explains the evolution of this type of female mating preference (the so-called lek paradox). Moreover, good-genes benefits are generally assumed to be too small to outweigh opposing direct selection on females. Here, we review recent progress in the study of mate choice for genetic quality, focussing particularly on the potential for genotype by environment interactions (GEIs) to rescue additive genetic variation for quality, and thereby resolve the lek paradox. We raise five questions that we think will stimulate empirical progress in this field, and suggest directions for research in each area: (1) How is condition-dependence affected by environmental variation? (2) How important are GEIs for maintaining additive genetic variance in condition? (3) How much do GEIs reduce the signalling value of male condition? (4) How does GEI affect the multivariate version of the lek paradox? (5) Have mating biases for high-condition males evolved because of indirect benefits?

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

GEI:

Genotype-by-environment interaction

References

  • Andersson M (1982) Sexual selection, natural selection and quality advertisement. Biol J Linn Soc 17:375–393

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersson M (1994) Sexual selection. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersson M, Simmons LW (2006) Sexual selection and mate choice. Trends Ecol Evol 21:296–302

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Andersson S, Pryke SR, Ornborg J, Lawes MJ, Andersson M (2002) Multiple receivers, multiple ornaments, and a trade-off between agonistic and epigamic signaling in a widowbird. Am Nat 160:683–691

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Arnqvist G, Kirkpatrick M (2005) The evolution of infidelity in socially monogamous passerines: the strength of direct and indirect selection on extrapair copulation behavior in females. Am Nat 165:S27–S36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arnqvist G, Rowe L (2005) Sexual conflict. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentsen CL, Hunt J, Jennions MD, Brooks R (2006) Complex multivariate sexual selection on male acoustic signaling in a wild population of Teleogryllus commodus. Am Nat 167:E102–E116

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Blows MW (2007) A tale of two matrices: multivariate approaches in evolutionary biology. J Evol Biol 20:1–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Blows MW, Hoffmann AA (2005) A reassessment of genetic limits to evolutionary change. Ecology 86:1371–1384

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonduriansky R (2007) The evolution of condition-dependent sexual dimorphism. Am Nat 169:9–19

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bonduriansky R, Rowe L (2003) Interactions among mechanisms of sexual selection on male body size and head shape in a sexually dimorphic fly. Evolution 57:2046–2053

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bonduriansky R, Rowe L (2005) Sexual selection, genetic architecture, and the condition dependence of body shape in the sexually dimorphic fly Prochyliza xanthostoma (Piophilidae). Evolution 59:138–151

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brandt LSE, Greenfield MD (2004) Condition-dependent traits and the capture of genetic variance in male advertisement song. J Evol Biol 17:821–828

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brcic-Kostic K (2005) Neutral mutation as the source of genetic variation in life history traits. Genet Res 86:53–63

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks R (2000) Negative genetic correlation between male sexual attractiveness and survival. Nature 406:67–70

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks R, Hunt J, Blows MW, Smith MJ, Bussière LF, Jennions MD (2005) Experimental evidence for multivariate stabilizing sexual selection. Evolution 59:871–880

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bürger R, Gimelfarb A (2002) Fluctuating environments and the role of mutation in maintaining quantitative genetic variation. Genet Res 80:31–46

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Byers DL (2005) Evolution in heterogeneous environments and the potential of maintenance of genetic variation in traits of adaptive significance. Genetica 123:107–124

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Candolin U (2004) Opposing selection on a sexually dimorphic trait through female choice and male competition in a water boatman. Evolution 58:1861–1864

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Charmantier A, Garant D (2005) Environmental quality and evolutionary potential: lessons from wild populations. Proc R Soc Lond B 272:1415–1425

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charmantier A, Perrins C, McCleery RH, Sheldon BC (2006) Quantitative genetics of age at reproduction in wild swans: support for antagonistic pleiotropy models of senescence. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103:6587–6592

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cotton S, Small J, Pomiankowski A (2006) Sexual selection and condition-dependent mate preferences. Curr Biol 16:R755–R765

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Danielson-Francois AM, Kelly JK, Greenfield MD (2006) Genotype x environment interaction for male attractiveness in an acoustic moth: evidence for plasticity and canalization. J Evol Biol 19:532–542

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • David P, Bjorksten T, Fowler K, Pomiankowski A (2000) Condition-dependent signalling of genetic variation in stalk-eyes flies. Nature 406:186–188

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dykhuizen D, Hartl DL (1980) Selective neutrality of 6PGD allozymes in Escherichia coli and the effects of genetic background. Genetics 96:801–817

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ellner S, Hairston NG (1994) Role of overlapping generations in maintaining genetic variation in a fluctuating environment. Am Nat 143:403–417

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emlen DJ (1996) Artificial selection on horn length body-size allometry in the horned beetle Onthophagus acuminatus (Coleoptera, Scarabaeidae). Evolution 50:1219–1230

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etges WJ, de Oliveira CC, Gragg E, Ortiz-Barrientos D, Noor MAF, Ritchie MG (2007) Genetics of incipient speciation in Drosophila mojavensis. I. Male courtship song, mating success, and genotype x environment interactions. Evolution 61:1106–1119

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Felsenstein J (1976) The theoretical population genetics of variable selection and migration. Ann Rev Genet 10:253–280

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Forslund P (2003) An experimental investigation into status dependent male dimorphism in the European earwig, Forficula auricularia. Anim Behav 65:309–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frank SA, Slatkin M (1990) Evolution in a variable environment. Am Nat 136:244–260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frankino WA, Zwaan BJ, Stern DL, Brakefield PM (2005) Natural selection and developmental constraints in the evolution of allometries. Science 307:718–720

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gebhardt-Henrich SG, van Noordwijk AJ (1991) Nestling growth in the Great Tit. I. Heritability estimates under different environmental conditions. J Evol Biol 3:341–362

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson G, Dworkin I (2004) Uncovering cryptic genetic variation Nature Reviews. Genetics 5:681–U11

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Glazier DS (1999) Trade-offs between reproductive and somatic (storage) investments in animals: a comparative test of the van Noordwijk and de Jong model. Evol Ecol 13:539–555

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glazier DS (2002) Resource-allocation rules and the heritability of traits. Evolution 56:1696–1700

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Greenfield MD, Rodriguez RL (2004) Genotype-environment interactions and the reliability of mating signals. Anim Behav 68:1461–1468

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffith SC (2007) The evolution of infidelity in socially monogamous passerines: neglected components of direct and indirect selection. Am Nat 169:274–281

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Haldane JBS, Jayakar SD (1963) Polymorphism due to selection of varying direction. Heredity 58:237–242

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall M, Lindholm AK, Brooks R (2004) Direct selection on male attractiveness and female preference fails to produce a response. BMC Evol Biol 4:1

    Google Scholar 

  • Head ML, Hunt J, Jennions MD, Brooks R (2005) The indirect benefits of mating with attractive males outweigh the direct costs. PLoS Biol 3:289–294

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hedrick PW (1986) Genetic polymorphism in heterogeneous environments: a decade later. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 17:535–566

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hedrick PW, Ginevan ME, Ewing EP (1976) Genetic polymorphism in heterogeneous environments. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 7:1–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hegyi G, Rosivall B, Torok J (2006) Paternal age and offspring growth: separating the intrinsic quality of young from rearing effects. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 60:672–682

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henderson CR (1982) Analysis of covariance in the mixed model: higher-level, non-homogeneous, and random regressions. Biometrics 38:623–640

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hine E, Chenoweth SF, Blows MW (2004) Multivariate quantitative genetics and the lek paradox: genetic variance in male sexually selected traits of Drosophila serrata under field conditions. Evolution 58:2754–2762

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Houle D (1989) The maintenance of polygenic variation in finite populations. Evolution 43:1767–1780

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunt J, Blows MW, Zajitschek F, Jennions MD, Brooks R (2007) Reconciling strong stabilizing selection with the maintenance of genetic variation in a natural population of black field crickets (Teleogryllus commodus). Genetics 177:875–880

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hunt J, Brooks R, Jennions MD, Smith MJ, Bentsen CL, Bussière LF (2004a) High-quality male field crickets invest heavily in sexual display but die young. Nature 432:1024–1027

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hunt J, Bussière LF, Jennions MD, Brooks R (2004b) What is genetic quality? Trends Ecol Evol. 19:329–333

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hunt J, Jennions MD, Spyrou N, Brooks R (2006) Artificial selection on male longevity influences age-dependent reproductive effort in the black field cricket Teleogryllus commodus. Am Nat 168:E72–E86

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hunt J, Simmons LW (2001) Status-dependent selection in the dimorphic beetle Onthophagus taurus. Proc R Soc Lond B 268:2409–2414

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jia FY, Greenfield MD, Collins RD (2000) Genetic variance of sexually selected traits in waxmoths: maintenance by genotype x environment interaction. Evolution 54:953–967

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kemp DJ, Rutowski RL (2007) Condition dependence, quantitative genetics, and the potential signal content of iridescent ultraviolet butterfly coloration. Evolution 61:168–183

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kirkpatrick M, Ryan M (1991) The evolution of mating preferences and the paradox of the lek. Nature 350:33–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirzhner VM, Korol AB, Ronin YI, Nevo E (1994) Cyclical behavior of genotype frequencies in a 2–locus population under fluctuating haploid selection. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 91:11432–11436

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kirzhner VM, Korol AB, Ronin YI, Nevo E (1995) Genetic supercycles caused by cyclical selection. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 92:7130–7133

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Klingenberg CP (2003) Quantitative genetics of geometric shape: heritability and the pitfalls of the univariate approach. Evolution 57:191–195

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kokko H (1998) Good genes, old age and life-history trade-offs. Evol Ecol 12:739–750

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kokko H, Brooks R, Jennions MD, Morley J (2003) The evolution of mate choice and mating biases. Proc R Soc Lond B 270:653–664

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kokko H, Brooks R, McNamara JM, Houston AI (2002) The sexual selection continuum. Proc R Soc Lond B 269:1331–1340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kokko H, Heubel K (2007) Condition-dependence, genotype-by-environment interactions, and the lek paradox. Genetica. doi:10.1007/s10709-007-9166-1

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kondrashov AS, Yampolsky LY (1996) High genetic variability under the balance between symmetric mutation and fluctuating stabilizing selection. Genet Res 68:157–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kotiaho JS, Simmons LW, Tomkins JL (2001) Towards a resolution of the lek paradox. Nature 410:684–686

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kruuk LEB (2004) Estimating genetic parameters in natural populations using the ‘animal model’. Phil Trans R Soc Lond B 359:873–890

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lailvaux SP, Irschick DJ (2006) A functional perspective on sexual selection: insights and future prospects. Anim Behav 72:263–273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LeBas NR, Hockham LR, Ritchie MG (2004) Sexual selection in the gift-giving dance fly, Rhamphomyia sulcata, favors small males carrying small gifts. Evolution 58:1763–1772

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Merila J (1996) Genetic variation in offspring condition: an experiment. Funct Ecol 10:465–474

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merila J, Przybylo R, Sheldon BC (1999) Genetic variation and natural selection on blue tit body condition in different environments. Genet Res 73:165–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller LK, Brooks R (2005) The effects of genotype, age, and social environment on male ornamentation, mating behavior, and attractiveness. Evolution 59:2414–2425

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mills SC, Alatalo RV, Koskela E, Mappes J, Mappes T, Oksanen TA (2007) Signal reliability compromised by genotype-by-environment interactions and potential mechanisms for its preservation. Evolution 61:1748–1757

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Moore AJ, Moore PJ (1999) Balancing sexual selection through opposing mate choice and male competition. Proc R Soc Lond B 266:711–716

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nussey DH, Wilson AJ, Brommer JE (2007) The evolutionary ecology of individual phenotypic plasticity in wild populations. J Evol Biol 20:831–844

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien EL, Dawson RD (2007) Context-dependent genetic benefits of extra-pair mate choice in a socially monogamous passerine. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 61:775–782

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pischedda A, Chippindale AK (2006) Intralocus sexual conflict diminishes the benefits of sexual selection. PLoS Biol 4:2099–2103

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Postma E (2006) Implications of the difference between true and predicted breeding values for the study of natural selection and micro-evolution. J Evol Biol 19:309–320

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Qvarnstrom A (1999) Genotype-by-environment interactions in the determination of the size of a secondary sexual character in the collared flycatcher (Ficedula albicollis). Evolution 53:1564–1572

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Radwan J (2007) Maintenance of genetic variation in sexual ornaments: a review of the mechanisms. Genetica. doi:10.1007/s10709-007-9203-0

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Radwan J, Unrug J, Tomkins JL (2002) Status-dependence and morphological trade-offs in the expression of a sexually selected character in the mite, Sancassania berlesei. J Evol Biol 15:744–752

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson MR, Pilkington JG, Clutton-Brock TH, Pemberton JM, Kruuk LEB (2006) Live fast, die young: trade-offs between fitness components and sexually antagonistic selection on weaponry in Soay sheep. Evolution 60:2168–2181

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez RL, Greenfield MD (2003) Genetic variance and phenotypic plasticity in a component of female mate choice in an ultrasonic moth. Evolution 57:1304–1313

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Roff DA (1997) Evolutionary quantitative genetics. Chapman & Hall, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Roff DA, Fairbairn DJ (2007) The evolution of trade-offs: where are we? J Evol Biol 20:433–447

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rowe L, Houle D (1996) The lek paradox and the capture of genetic variance by condition dependent traits. Proc R Soc Lond B 263:1415–1421

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schaeffer LR (2004) Application of random regression models in animal breeding. Livest Prod Sci 86:35–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmoll T, Dietrich V, Winkel W, Epplen JT, Schurr F, Lubjuhn T (2005) Paternal genetic effects on offspring fitness are context dependent within the extrapair mating system of a socially monogamous passerine. Evolution 59:645–657

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sgrò CM, Hoffmann AA (2004) Genetic correlations, tradeoffs and environmental variation. Heredity 93:241–248

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sheldon BC, Arponen H, Laurila A, Crochet PA, Merila J (2003) Sire coloration influences offspring survival under predation risk in the moorfrog. J Evol Biol 16:1288–1295

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Shuster SM, Wade MJ (2003) Mating systems and strategies. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Simmons LW, Emlen DJ (2006) Evolutionary trade-off between weapons and testes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103:16346–16351

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Takahata N (1981) Genetic variability and rate of gene substitution in a finite population under mutation and fluctuating selection. Genetics 98:427–440

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tallamy DW, Darlington MB, Pesek JD, Powell BE (2003) Copulatory courtship signals male genetic quality in cucumber beetles. Proc R Soc Lond B 270:77–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tomkins JL, Radwan J, Kotiaho JS, Tregenza T (2004) Genic capture and resolving the lek paradox. Trends Ecol Evol 19:323–328

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Van Homrigh A, Higgie M, McGuigan K, Blows MW (2007) The depletion of genetic variance by sexual selection. Curr Biol 17:528–532

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • van Noordwijk AJ, de Jong G (1986) Acquisition and allocation of resources: their influence on variation in life-history tactics. Am Nat 128:137–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Welch AM (2003) Genetic benefits of a female mating preference in gray tree frogs are context-dependent. Evolution 57:883–893

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Welch AM, Semlitsch RD, Gerhardt HC (1998) Call duration as an indicator of genetic quality in male gray tree frogs. Science 280:1928–1930

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson AJ, Pemberton JM, Pilkington JG, Coltman DW, Mifsud DV, Clutton-Brock TH, Kruuk LEB (2006) Environmental coupling of selection and heritability limits evolution. PLoS Biol 4:1270–1275

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zeng ZB, Cockerham CC (1993) Mutation models and quantitative genetic-variation. Genetics 133:729–736

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang XS, Hill WG (2005) Genetic variability under mutation selection balance. Trends Ecol Evol 20:468–470

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Trevor Pitcher and Herman Mays for organizing the symposium on genetic quality that enabled this debate. We also thank Mark Blows, Marco Demont, Tracie Ivy, Hanna Kokko, Ane Laugen, Andrew Pemberton, and especially Lukas Keller for very helpful discussions during the preparation of the manuscript. Locke Rowe and Goran Arnqvist have patiently contributed through explanations and discussions with LFB over the years. LFB and KNS were supported by the University of Zurich in the form of grants to Paul Ward and Anthony Wilson, and KNS also received funds from the University of Zurich Forschungskredit. JH was supported by a NERC (UK) Fellowship, and RB and MDJ were supported through grants and QEII Research Fellowships from the Australian Research Council.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Zoologisches Museum der Universität Zürich, Winterthurerstrasse 190, CH 8057, Zürich, Switzerland

    Luc F. Bussière & Kai N. Stölting

  2. School of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling, FK9 4LA, UK

    Luc F. Bussière

  3. Centre for Ecology and Conservation, School of Biosciences, The University of Exeter in Cornwall, Penryn, TR10 9EZ, UK

    John Hunt

  4. School of Botany and Zoology, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, 0200, Australia

    Michael D. Jennions

  5. Evolution & Ecology Research Centre and School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, 2052, Australia

    Robert Brooks

Authors
  1. Luc F. Bussière
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. John Hunt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kai N. Stölting
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Michael D. Jennions
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Robert Brooks
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Luc F. Bussière.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bussière, L.F., Hunt, J., Stölting, K.N. et al. Mate choice for genetic quality when environments vary: suggestions for empirical progress. Genetica 134, 69–78 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10709-007-9220-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10709-007-9220-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation