The DOI matches its Crossref record; 164 of the 164 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The evolution of male mate choice in insects: a synthesis of ideas and evidence
Abstract
Mate choice by males has been recognized at least since Darwin's time, but its phylogenetic distribution and effect on the evolution of female phenotypes remain poorly known. Moreover, the relative importance of factors thought to underlie the evolution of male mate choice (especially parental investment and mate quality variance) is still unresolved. Here I synthesize the empirical evidence and theory pertaining to the evolution of male mate choice and sex role reversal in insects, and examine the potential for male mating p to generate sexual selection on female phenotypes. Although male mate choice has received relatively little empirical study, the available evidence suggests that it is widespread among insects (and other animals). In addition to ‘precopulatory’ male mate choice, some insects exhibit ‘cryptic’ male mate choice, varying the amount of resources allocated to mating on the basis of female mate quality. As predicted by theory, the most commonly observed male mating p are those that tend to maximize a male's expected fertilization success from each mating. Such p tend to favour female phenotypes associated with high fecundity or reduced sperm competition intensity. Among insect species there is wide variation in mechanisms used by males to assess female mate quality, some of which (e.g. probing, antennating or repeatedly mounting the female) may be difficult to distinguish from copulatory courtship. According to theory, selection for male choosiness is an increasing function of mate quality variance and those reproductive costs that reduce, with each mating, the number of subsequent matings that a male can perform (‘mating investment’). Conversely, choosiness is constrained by the costs of mate search and assessment, in combination with the accuracy of assessment of potential mates and of the distribution of mate qualities. Stronger selection for male choosiness may also be expected in systems where female fitness increases with each copulation than in systems where female fitness peaks at a small number of matings. This theoretical framework is consistent with most of the empirical evidence. Furthermore, a variety of observed male mating p have the potential to exert sexual selection on female phenotypes. However, because male insects typically choose females based on phenotypic indicators of fecundity such as body size, and these are usually amenable to direct visual or tactile assessment, male mate choice often tends to reinforce stronger vectors of fecundity or viability selection, and seldom results in the evolution of female display traits. Research on orthopterans has shown that complete sex role reversal (i.e. males choosy, females competitive) can occur when male parental investment limits female fecundity and reduces the potential rate of reproduction of males sufficiently to produce a female‐biased operational sex ratio. By contrast, many systems exhibiting partial sex role reversal (i.e. males choosy and competitive) are not associated with elevated levels of male parental investment, reduced male reproductive rates, or reduced male bias in the operational sex ratio. Instead, large female mate quality variance resulting from factors such as strong last‐male sperm precedence or large variance in female fecundity may select for both male choosiness and competitiveness in such systems. Thus, partial and complete sex role reversal do not merely represent different points along a continuum of increasing male parental investment, but may evolve via different evolutionary pathways.
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
The descent of man and selection in relation to sex
(1907) · The Journal of the Anthropological Society of Tokyo · doi:10.1537/ase1887.22.495 · Cited by 10,892
Parental Investment and Sexual Selection
(2017) · Sexual Selection and the Descent of Man · doi:10.4324/9781315129266-7 · Cited by 9,510
Sexual Selection and the Descent of Man: The Darwinian Pivot
(2017) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315129266 · Cited by 7,252
Ecology, Sexual Selection, and the Evolution of Mating Systems
Emlen, S. T., & Oring, L. W. (1977) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.327542 · Cited by 6,230
Intra-sexual selection in Drosophila
Bateman, A. J. (1948) · Heredity · doi:10.1038/hdy.1948.21 · Cited by 3,643
SPERM COMPETITION AND ITS EVOLUTIONARY CONSEQUENCES IN THE INSECTS
PARKER, G. A. (1970) · Biological Reviews · doi:10.1111/j.1469-185x.1970.tb01176.x · Cited by 3,596
Natural Selection, the Costs of Reproduction, and a Refinement of Lack's Principle
Williams, G. C. (1966) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/282461 · Cited by 3,276
Female Control: Sexual Selection by Cryptic Female Choice
Eberhard, W. (1996) · Princeton University Press eBooks · doi:10.1515/9780691207209 · Cited by 2,749
Sexual Selection and Reproductive Competition in Insects
(1979) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-108750-0.x5001-0 · Cited by 1,692
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
Cited by
Reproductive Interference Between Animal Species
Gröning, J., & Hochkirch, A. (2008) · The Quarterly Review of Biology · doi:10.1086/590510 · Cited by 594
Bateman's principles and human sex roles
Brown, G. R., Laland, K. N., & Mulder, M. B. (2009) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2009.02.005 · Cited by 295
Odor Communication and Mate Choice in Rodents
Ferkin, M. (2018) · Biology · doi:10.3390/biology7010013 · Cited by 55
Copulation duration in the soldier fly: the roles of cryptic male choice and sperm competition risk
Barbosa, F. (2011) · Behavioral Ecology · doi:10.1093/beheco/arr137 · Cited by 35
Males responding to sperm competition cues have higher fertilization success in a soldier fly
Barbosa, F. (2012) · Behavioral Ecology · doi:10.1093/beheco/ars035 · Cited by 23
Metadata
- Authors
- BONDURIANSKY, R.
- Venue
- Biological Reviews
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2001-08
- Volume
- 76
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 305-339
- ISSN
- 0006-3231 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-7931
- 1469-185X
- OpenAlex
- W2127304074
- Cited by
- 1,018
- References
- 164
- FWCI
- 2.69
- 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: The evolution of male mate choice in insects: a synthesis of ideas and evidence. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/s1464793101005693
- The paper
- BONDURIANSKY, R. (2001). The evolution of male mate choice in insects: a synthesis of ideas and evidence. Biological Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1464793101005693
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.