The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Sympatric Speciation by Sexual Selection: A Critical Reevaluation
Open accessAbstract
Several empirical studies put forward sexual selection as an important driving force of sympatric speciation. This idea agrees with recent models suggesting that speciation may proceed by means of divergent Fisherian runaway processes within a single population. Notwithstanding this, the models so far have not been able to demonstrate that sympatric speciation can unfold as a fully adaptive process driven by sexual selection alone. Implicitly or explicitly, most models rely on nonselective factors to initiate speciation. In fact, they do not provide a selective explanation for the considerable variation in female preferences required to trigger divergent runaway processes. We argue that such variation can arise by disruptive selection but only when selection on female preferences is frequency dependent. Adaptive speciation is therefore unattainable in traditional female choice models, which assume selection on female preferences to be frequency independent. However, when frequency-dependent sexual selection processes act alongside mate choice, truly adaptive sympatric speciation becomes feasible. Speciation is then initiated independently of nonadaptive processes and does not suffer from the theoretical weaknesses associated with the current Fisherian runaway model of speciation. However, adaptive speciation requires the simultaneous action of multiple mechanisms, and therefore it occurs under conditions far more restrictive than earlier models of sympatric speciation by sexual selection appear to suggest.
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
Natural selection and random genetic drift in phenotypic evolution
Lande, R. (1976) · Evolution · doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.1976.tb00911.x · Cited by 1,828
Cited by
Linking color polymorphism maintenance and speciation
Gray, S. M., & McKinnon, J. S. (2007) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2006.10.005 · Cited by 593
How is female mate choice affected by male competition?
Wong, B. B. M., & Candolin, U. (2005) · Biological Reviews · doi:10.1017/s1464793105006809 · Cited by 455
Autopolyploidy in angiosperms: Have we grossly underestimated the number of species?
(2007) · Taxon · doi:10.2307/25065732 · Cited by 452
On the origin of species by natural and sexual selection
van Doorn, G. S., Edelaar, P., & Weissing, F. J. (2009) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1181661 · Cited by 342
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- van Doorn, G. S., Dieckmann, U., & Weissing, F. J.
- Venue
- The American Naturalist
- Publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- Published
- 2004-05
- Volume
- 163
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 709-725
- ISSN
- 0003-0147 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-5323
- OpenAlex
- W2015635519
- Cited by
- 184
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 15.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Sympatric Speciation by Sexual Selection: A Critical Reevaluation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/383619
- The paper
- van Doorn, G. S., Dieckmann, U., & Weissing, F. J. (2004). Sympatric Speciation by Sexual Selection: A Critical Reevaluation. The American Naturalist. https://doi.org/10.1086/383619
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.