The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Female choice response to artificial selection on an exaggerated male trait in a stalk-eyed fly
Abstract
Quantitative genetic models for the evolution of exaggerated male traits through female mate choice predict that selection on male ornaments should cause a correlated response in female preferences. Furthermore, female selectivity should be inversely related to costs of mate choice. Here we use a stalk-eyed fly, Cyrtodiopsis dalmanni (Diptera: Diopsidae), which exhibits pronounced sexual dimorphism in eye span, to evaluate these predictions. Field observations reveal that each evening females aggregate while males disperse among roosting sites where mating occurs. A positive regression between male relative eye span and the number of females in an aggregation suggests that sexual selection acts on male eye span. Mate choice experiments in the lab, using flies after 13 generations of bidirectional selection on male relative eye span, reveal that females from long eye-span lines and an unselected population preferred long eye-span males. Short eye-span line females, however, preferred short eye-span males, demonstrating a genetic correlation between female preference and a sexually selected male trait. Eye span of the largest male in a field aggregation correlated positively with female age, as estimated by amount of eye pigment, and was independent of egg number, thereby providing no evidence that mate choice impairs female survival or fecundity. 1.
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 measurement of selection on correlated characters
Lande, R., & Arnold, S. J. (1983) · Evolution · doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.1983.tb00236.x · Cited by 5,437
Cited by
Cotton, S., Fowler, K., & Pomiankowski, A. (2004) · Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2004.2688 · Cited by 625
VARIATION IN MATE CHOICE AND MATING PREFERENCES: A REVIEW OF CAUSES AND CONSEQUENCES
JENNIONS, M. D., & PETRIE, M. (1997) · Biological Reviews · doi:10.1111/j.1469-185x.1997.tb00015.x · Cited by 459
Quantitative genetic models of sexual selection
Mead, L. S., & Arnold, S. J. (2004) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2004.03.003 · Cited by 351
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
The origin of meaning in animal signals
Seyfarth, R. M., & Cheney, D. L. (2017) · Animal Behaviour · doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2016.05.020 · Cited by 116
Metadata
- Venue
- Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences
- Publisher
- The Royal Society
- Published
- 1994-01-22
- Volume
- 255
- Issue
- 1342
- Pages
- 1-6
- ISSN
- 0080-4649 (ISSN-L)
- 0962-8452
- 1471-2954
- OpenAlex
- W2104203355
- Cited by
- 270
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 18.98
- 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: Female choice response to artificial selection on an exaggerated male trait in a stalk-eyed fly. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1098/rspb.1994.0001
- The paper
- Female choice response to artificial selection on an exaggerated male trait in a stalk-eyed fly. (1994). Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.1994.0001
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.