Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evolution of sexual size dimorphism and sexual segregation in artiodactyls: the chicken or the egg?

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Mammalian Biology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In mammals, the dominant theory postulates a causal link between three sexual characters: first, sexual selection promoted the evolution of polygyny; then sexual size dimorphism (SSD) evolved due to male competition for mates in a polygynous context, finally sexual segregation occurred as a consequence of the different requirements generated by size difference between sexes. I reviewed the literature on artiodactyls to test an alternative hypothesis that SSD evolved by natural selection as a result of niche separation between sexes, which implies the reversal of the causal evolutionary relationships. I used phylogenetic confirmatory path analysis to test models that differ in the evolutionary links between characters and in the selection process (ecological pressures or competition for mates) involved. Path analysis indicated that the trigger for the evolutionary pathway toward polygyny was a shift from close to open habitats, which in turn caused an increase in body size, an increase in gregariousness, and dietary specialization. The subsequent transition was to a polygynous mating system, after which sexual segregation evolved, and SSD evolved mostly after niche separation between males and females. This alternative causal link ‘polygyny → sexual segregation → SSD’ can help to understand diverse phenomena, such as the ecological drivers of sexual segregation, the existence of many artiodactyl families that are monomorphic and polygynous and the correlated evolution of oral morphology.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data and material

Data used in the analysis are provided in an Appendix.

Code availability

Not applicable.

References

  • Akaike H (1974) A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Trans Autom Control 19:716–723

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexander RD, Hoogland JL, Howard RD, Noonan KM, Sherman PW (1979) Sexual dimorphism and breeding systems in pinnipeds, ungulates, primates and humans. In: Chagnon N, Irons W (eds) Evolutionary biology and human social behaviour: an anthropological perspective. Duxbury Press, North Scituate, MA, pp 402–435

    Google Scholar 

  • Allaine D, Pontier D, Gaillard JM, Lebreton JD, Trouvilliez J, Clobert J (1987) The relationship between fecundity and adult body weight in homeotherms. Oecologia 73(3):478–480

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bowyer RT (2004) Sexual segregation in ruminants: definitions, hypotheses, and implications for conservation and management. J Mamm 85:1039–1052

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowyer RT, McCullough DR, Rachlow JL, Ciuti S, Whiting JC (2020) Evolution of ungulate mating systems: integrating social and environmental factors. Ecol Evol. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.6246

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Boyce MS (ed) (1988) Evolution of life histories of mammals: theory and pattern. Yale University Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach, 2nd edn. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnham KP, Anderson DR, Huyvaert KP (2011) AIC model selection and multimodel inference in behavioral ecology: some background, observations, and comparisons. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 65(1):23–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Cardon M, Loot G, Grenouillet G, Blanchet S (2011) Host characteristics and environmental factors differentially drive the burden and pathogenicity of an ectoparasite: a multilevel causal analysis. J Anim Ecol 80:657–667

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Carranza J (2009) Defining sexual selection as sex-dependent selection. Anim Behav 77:749–753

    Google Scholar 

  • Cassini MH (2017) Role of fecundity selection on the evolution of size sexual dimorphism in mammals. Anim Behav 128:1–4

    Google Scholar 

  • Cassini MH (2020a) Sexual size dimorphism and sexual selection in artiodactyls. Behav Ecol 31:792–797

    Google Scholar 

  • Cassini MH (2020b) Sexual size dimorphism and sexual selection in primates. Mamm Rev 50:231–239

    Google Scholar 

  • Cassini MH (2021) Sexual aggression in mammals. Mamm Rev 51:247–255

    Google Scholar 

  • Charnov EL (1993) Life history invariants. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Clutton-Brock TH (2004) What is sexual selection? In: Kappeler PM, van Schaik CP (eds) Sexual selection in primates: new and comparative perspectives. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 22–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Clutton-Brock TH (2016) Mammal societies. Wiley, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Clutton-Brock TH, Guinness FE, Albon SD (1982) Red deer: behavior and ecology of two sexes. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Clutton-Brock TH, Iason GR, Guinness FE (1987) Sexual segregation and density-related changes in habitat use in male and female Red deer (Cerrus elaphus). J Zool 211(2):275–289

    Google Scholar 

  • Darwin C (1871) The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex. John, London

    Google Scholar 

  • De Lisle SP (2019) Understanding the evolution of ecological sex differences: integrating character displacement and the Darwin–Bateman paradigm. Evol Lett 3:434–447

    Google Scholar 

  • Emlen ST, Oring LW (1977) Ecology, sexual selection and the evolution of mating systems. Science 197:215–223

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fairbairn DJ (1997) Allometry for sexual size dimorphism: pattern and process in the coevolution of body size in males and females. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 28:659–682

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaulin SJC, Sailer LD (1984) Sexual dimorphism in weight among the primates: the relative impact of allometry and sexual selection. Int J Primatol 5:515–535

    Google Scholar 

  • Gonzalez-Voyer A, von Hardenberg A (2014) An introduction to phylogenetic path analysis. In: Garamszegi LZ (ed) Modern phylogenetic comparative methods and their application in evolutionary biology. Springer, Berlin, pp 201–229

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon AD (2006) Scaling of size and dimorphism in primates II: microevolution. Int J Primatol 27:63–105

    Google Scholar 

  • Janis CM (1982) Evolution of horns in ungulates: ecology and paleoecology. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 57:261–317

    Google Scholar 

  • Jarman PJ (1974) The social organisation of antelope in relation to their ecology. Behaviour 48:215–266

    Google Scholar 

  • Jarman PJ (1983) Mating system and sexual dimorphism in large, terrestrial, mammalian herbivores. Biol Rev 58:485–520

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones KE, Bielby J, Cardillo M, Fritz SA, O’Dell J, Orme CDL et al (2009) PanTHERIA: a species-level database of life history, ecology, and geography of extant and recently extinct mammals. Ecology 90:2648

    Google Scholar 

  • Krüger O, Wolf JBH, Jonker RM, Hoffman JI, Trillmich R (2014) Disentangling the contribution of sexual selection and ecology to the evolution of size dimorphism in pinnipeds. Evolution 68:1485–1496

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lee PC, Majluf P, Gordon IJ (1991) Growth, weaning and maternal investment from a comparative perspective. J Zool Lond 225:99–114

    Google Scholar 

  • Li XY, Kokko H (2021) Sexual dimorphism driven by intersexual resource competition: why is it rare, and where to look for it? J Anim Ecol 90(8):1831–1843

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Lindenfors P, Tullberg BS, Biuw M (2002) Phylogenetic analyses of sexual selection and sexual size dimorphism in pinnipeds. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 52:188–193

    Google Scholar 

  • Linklater WL (2000) Adaptive explanation in socio-ecology: lessons from the Equidae. Biol Rev 75:1–20

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Loison A, Gaillard JM, Pélabon C, Yoccoz NG (1999) What factors shape sexual size dimorphism in ungulates? Evol Ecol Res 1:611–633

    Google Scholar 

  • Main MB (2008) Reconciling competing ecological explanations for sexual segregation in ungulates. Ecology, 89: 693–704 male red deer (Cervus elaphus L.). J Zool [lond] 211:275–289

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitani J, Gros-Louis J, Richards A (1996) Sexual dimorphism, the operational sex ratio, and the intensity of male competition in polygynous primates. Am Nat 147:966–980

    Google Scholar 

  • Mysterud A (2000) The relationship between ecological segregation and sexual body size dimorphism in large herbivores. Oecologia 124:40–54

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pagel M (1992) A method for the analysis of comparative data. J Theor Biol 56:431–442

    Google Scholar 

  • Pagel M (1999) Inferring the historical patterns of biological evolution. Nature 401:877–884

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pérez-Barbería FJ, Gordon IJ (2000) Differences in body mass and oral morphology between the sexes in the Artiodactyla: evolutionary relationships with sexual segregation. Evol Ecol Res 2:667–684

    Google Scholar 

  • Pérez-Barbería FJ, Yearsley JM (2010) Sexual selection for fighting skills as a driver of sexual segregation in polygynous ungulates: an evolutionary model. Anim Behav 80:745–755

    Google Scholar 

  • Pérez-Barbería FJ, Gordon IJ, Pagel M (2002) The origins of sexual dimorphism in body size in ungulates. Evolution 56:1276–1285

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pinho GM, da Silva AG, Hrbek T, Venticinque EM, Farias IP (2014) Kinship and social behavior of lowland tapirs (Tapirus terrestris) in a Central Amazon Landscape. PLoS One 9(3):e92507

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Plavcan JM (2001) Sexual dimorphism in primate evolution. Yearb Phys Anthropol 44:25–53

    Google Scholar 

  • Plavcan JM, Van Schaik CP (1997) Intrasexual competition and body weight dimorphism in anthropoid primates. Am J Phys Anthrop 103:37–68

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Purvis A, Harvey PH (1995) Mammal life-history evolution-a comparative test of Charnov’s model. J Zool Lond 237:259–283

    Google Scholar 

  • Rachlow JL, Berkeley EV, Berger J (1998) Correlates of male mating strategies in white rhinos (Ceratotherium simum). J Mamm 79(4):1317–1324

    Google Scholar 

  • Ralls K (1977) Mammals in which females are larger than males. Q Rev Biol 51:245–276

    Google Scholar 

  • Rensch B (1950) Die Abhängigkeit der relativen Sexualdifferenz von der Körpergrösse. Bonner Zoologische Beiträge 1:58–69

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogowitz GL (1996) Trade-offs in energy allocation during lactation. Am Zool 36:197–204

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruckstuhl KE, Neuhaus P (2002) Sexual segregation in ungulates: a comparative test of three hypotheses. Biol Rev 77(1):77–96

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ruckstuhl KE, Neuhaus P (eds) (2005) Sexual segregation in vertebrates: ecology of the two sexes, 1st edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p 488

    Google Scholar 

  • Shipley B (2000a) Cause and correlation in biology: a user’s guide to path analysis, structural equations and causal inference. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Shipley B (2000b) A new inferential test for path models based on directed acyclic graphs. Struct Equ Model 7(2):206–218

    Google Scholar 

  • Shipley B (2009) Confirmatory path analysis in a generalized multilevel context. Ecology 90:363–368

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Slatkin M (1984) Ecological causes of sexual dimorphism. Evolution 38:622–630

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Smith RJ (1999) Statistics of sexual size dimorphism. J Hum Evol 36:423–459

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Terwilliger VJ (1978) Natural history of Baird’s Tapir on Barro Colorado Island, Panama Canal Zone. Biotropica 10:211–220

    Google Scholar 

  • Trillmich F, Trillmich KGK (1984) The mating systems of pinnipeds and marine iguanas: convergent evolution of polygyny. Biol J Linn Soc 21:209–216

    Google Scholar 

  • Trivers RL (1972) Parental investment and sexual selection. In: Campbell B (ed) Sexual selection and the descent of man, 1871–1971. Aldine-Atherton, Chicago, pp 136–179

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Bijl W (2018) Phylopath: easy phylogenetic path analysis in R. PeerJ 6:e4718

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Vilá BL, Cassini MH (1990) Aggressiveness between females and mother-pup separation in the southern sea lion, in Chubut, Argentina. Revista Chilena de Historia Natural 63:169–176

    Google Scholar 

  • von Hardenberg A, Gonzalez-Voyer A (2012) Disentangling evolutionary cause-effect relationships with phylogenetic confirmatory path analysis. Evolution 67(2):378–387

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilman H, Belmaker J, Simpson J, de la Rosa C, Rivadeneira MM, Jetz W (2014) EltonTraits 1.0: species-level foraging attributes of the world’s birds and mammals: ecological archives E095–178. Ecology 95:2027–2027

    Google Scholar 

  • Yearsley JM, Pérez-Barbería JF (2005) Does the activity budget hypothesis explain sexual segregation in ungulates? Anim Behav 69:257–267

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

I thank W. van der Bijl for his advice on the use of Phylopath package. MHC is Senior Researcher of the Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas, Argentina.

Funding

No funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratorio de Biología del Comportamiento, Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental, Obligado 2490, 1429, Buenos Aires, Argentina

    Marcelo H. Cassini

Authors
  1. Marcelo H. Cassini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

A sole author.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marcelo H. Cassini.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

No conflicts, no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Handling editor: Juan Carranza.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (XLSX 17 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cassini, M.H. Evolution of sexual size dimorphism and sexual segregation in artiodactyls: the chicken or the egg?. Mamm Biol 102, 131–141 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42991-021-00193-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42991-021-00193-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation