The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Sexual selection when the female directly benefits
Abstract
Why do females of many species mate with males on the basis of traits apparently detrimental to male survival? The answer may lie in the fact that these male traits are correlated with male condition. We consider the argument that high male condition directly benefits female fecundity and/or viability (e.g. through lower transmission of parasites, improved control of resources, or better paternal care). Using a quantitative genetic model we show how female preferences for male traits that indicate condition can evolve, even if the male traits themselves have deleterious effects on both the male and the female's fecundity. So-called ‘arbitrary preferences’ can spread in this way because male traits subject to sexual selection are often under additional selection to become correlated with condition. At equilibrium the positive effects of male condition on a female's fecundity and the negative effects of the male trait on her fecundity are balanced and the female preference is under stabilizing selection. The male trait will often be correlated with viability, but not with fecundity, even though the preference evolved as a result of differences in male fecundity. The mean fecundity of females is not maximized, and can steadily decline as the male trait and female preference evolve. If the male trait has no direct deleterious effects on female fecundity, as may happen in species with no paternal care, female preferences are under continuous directional selection to increase.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
QUANTITATIVE GENETIC ANALYSIS OF MULTIVARIATE EVOLUTION, APPLIED TO BRAIN:BODY SIZE ALLOMETRY
Lande, R. (1979) · Evolution · doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.1979.tb04694.x · Cited by 2,648
Signals, Signal Conditions, and the Direction of Evolution
Endler, J. A. (1992) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/285308 · Cited by 1,960
Cited by
The lek paradox and the capture of genetic variance by condition dependent traits
(1996) · Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.1996.0207 · Cited by 1,455
Lonely hearts or sex in the city? Density-dependent effects in mating systems
Kokko, H., & Rankin, D. J. (2006) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2005.1784 · Cited by 722
S., N., W., S., & S., P. (2002) · Journal of Comparative Physiology A: Sensory, Neural, and Behavioral Physiology · doi:10.1007/s00359-002-0361-3 · Cited by 481
THE EVOLUTION OF VOCALIZATION IN FROGS AND TOADS
Gerhardt, H. C. (1994) · Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev.es.25.110194.001453 · Cited by 462
Sexual selection and natural selection in bird speciation
Price, T. (1998) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.1998.0207 · Cited by 314
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Price, T.
- Venue
- Biological Journal of the Linnean Society
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1993-03
- Volume
- 48
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 187-211
- ISSN
- 0024-4066 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2062195766
- Cited by
- 265
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 13.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Sexual selection when the female directly benefits. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1006/bijl.1993.1014
- The paper
- Price, T. (1993). Sexual selection when the female directly benefits. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society. https://doi.org/10.1006/bijl.1993.1014
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.