Assortative mating in animals
Open accessAbstract
Assortative mating occurs when there is a correlation (positive or negative) between male and female phenotypes or genotypes across mated pairs. To determine the typical strength and direction of assortative mating in animals, we carried out a meta-analysis of published measures of assortative mating for a variety of phenotypic and genotypic traits in a diverse set of animal taxa. We focused on the strength of assortment within populations, excluding reproductively isolated populations and species. We collected 1,116 published correlations between mated pairs from 254 species (360 unique species-trait combinations) in five phyla. The mean correlation between mates was 0.28, showing an overall tendency toward positive assortative mating within populations. Although 19% of the correlations were negative, simulations suggest that these could represent type I error and that negative assortative mating may be rare. We also find significant differences in the strength of assortment among major taxonomic groups and among trait categories. We discuss various possible reasons for the evolution of assortative mating and its implications for speciation.
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
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.
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?
In that study [56], there was strong evidential value and p-values in the 0.045-0.05 bin were only a small proportion of published significant p-values.
“However, this study [ 56 ] also showed strong evidential value and p -values in the 0.045–0.05 bin were only a small proportion of published significant p -values.”
From The Extent and Consequences of P-Hacking in Science (2015) · cites this paper as [56]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Methods of Meta-Analysis: Correcting Error and Bias in Research Findings
Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (2015) · doi:10.4135/9781483398105 · Cited by 5,542 · see citing works
The Handbook of Research Synthesis and Meta-Analysis
(2019) · doi:10.7758/9781610448864 · Cited by 4,553 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Extent and Consequences of P-Hacking in Science
Head, M. L., Holman, L., Lanfear, R., Kahn, A. T., & Jennions, M. D. (2015) · PLOS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1002106 · Cited by 1,388 · see citing works
“However, this study [56] also showed strong evidential value and p -values in the 0.045 – 0.05 bin were only a small proportion of published significant p -values.”
BackgroundInfluentialReproductive senescence: new perspectives in the wild
Lemaître, J., & Gaillard, J. (2017) · Biological Reviews · doi:10.1111/brv.12328 · Cited by 225 · see citing works
Imprint of assortative mating on the human genome
Yengo, L., Robinson, M. R., Keller, M. C., Kemper, K. E., Yang, Y., Trzaskowski, M., Gratten, J., Turley, P., Cesarini, D., Benjamin, D. J., et al. (2018) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-018-0476-3 · Cited by 148 · see citing works
Bias in Mendelian randomization due to assortative mating
Hartwig, F. P., Davies, N. M., & Davey Smith, G. (2018) · Genetic Epidemiology · doi:10.1002/gepi.22138 · Cited by 99 · see citing works
- Authors
- Jiang, Y., Bolnick, D. I., & Kirkpatrick, M.
- Affiliations
- The University of Texas at Austin (US)
- Howard Hughes Medical Institute (US)
- Venue
- The American Naturalist
- Publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- Published
- 2013-06
- Volume
- 181
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- E125-E138
- ISSN
- 0003-0147 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-5323
- OpenAlex
- W2124992426
- Cited by
- 427
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 19 · 2025: 31 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 45 · 2022: 36 · 2021: 36 · 2020: 40 · 2019: 29 · 2018: 34 · 2017: 41 · 2016: 35 · 2015: 34 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 3
- FWCI
- 32.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- hdl.handle.net
- Licence
- other-oa
- Locations
- The American Naturalist (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Texas ScholarWorks (Texas Digital Library) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation
- David and Lucile Packard Foundation
- 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 › Evolution and Genetic Dynamics
- Keywords
- assortative mating, mate choice, phenotypic correlation, genetic correlation, mated pairs, type I error, mating system evolution, speciation
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Biological Evolution, Female, Genotype, Male, Models, Biological, Phenotype, Models, Statistical, Genetic Speciation, Mating Preference, Animal
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
