Cited by 301Animal Behavior and ReproductionEvolutionary Psychology and Human BehaviorInsect and Arachnid Ecology and Behavior

Towards a resolution of the lek paradox

Kotiaho, Janne S., Simmons, Leigh W., Tomkins, Joseph L.·2001·Nature

Abstract

Genetic benefits in the shape of 'good genes' have been invoked to explain costly female choice in the absence of direct fitness benefits. Little genetic variance in fitness traits is expected, however, because directional selection tends to drive beneficial alleles to fixation. There seems to be little potential, therefore, for female choice to result in genetic benefits, giving rise to the 'lek paradox'. Nevertheless, evidence shows that genetic variance persists despite directional selection and genetic benefits of female choice are frequently reported. A theoretical solution to the lek paradox has been proposed on the basis of two assumptions: that traits are condition-dependent, and that condition shows high genetic variance. The observed genetic variability in sexual traits will be accounted for, because a proportion of the genetic variance in condition will be captured and expressed in the trait. Here we report results from experiments showing that male courtship rate in the dung beetle Onthophagus taurus is a condition-dependent trait that is preferred by females. More importantly, male condition has high genetic variance and is genetically correlated with courtship rate. Our results thereby represent a significant step towards a resolution of the lek paradox.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/35070557

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kotiaho, J. S., Simmons, L. W., & Tomkins, J. L.
Affiliations
  • The University of Western Australia (AU)
  • University of St Andrews (GB)
Corresponding author
Kotiaho, Janne S.
Venue
Nature
Published
2001-04
Volume
410
Issue
6829
Pages
684-686
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W1624004185
Cited by
301
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 12
FWCI
24.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UWA Profiles and Research Repository (UWA) (submittedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Insect and Arachnid Ecology and Behavior
Keywords
lek paradox, female mate choice, good genes, genetic variance, directional selection, male condition, Onthophagus taurus, dung beetles, genetic correlation, sexual selection
MeSH terms
Animals, Coleoptera, Courtship, Biological Evolution, Female, Food, Male, Models, Biological, Sexual Behavior, Animal, Genetic Variation

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