Sexual size dimorphism in seabirds: sexual selection, fecundity selection and differential niche-utilisation

Oikos ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 113 (3) ◽  
pp. 385-394 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martín-Alejandro Serrano-Meneses ◽  
Tamás Székely
2020 ◽  
Vol 287 (1918) ◽  
pp. 20192640 ◽  
Author(s):  
Curtis R. Horne ◽  
Andrew G. Hirst ◽  
David Atkinson

Variation in the degree of sexual size dimorphism (SSD) among taxa is generally considered to arise from differences in the relative intensity of male–male competition and fecundity selection. One might predict, therefore, that SSD will vary systematically with (1) the intensity of sexual selection for increased male size, and (2) the intensity of fecundity selection for increased female size. To test these two fundamental hypotheses, we conducted a phylogenetic comparative analysis of SSD in fish. Specifically, using records of body length at first sexual maturity from FishBase, we quantified variation in the magnitude and direction of SSD in more than 600 diverse freshwater and marine fish species, from sticklebacks to sharks. Although female-biased SSD was common, and thought to be driven primarily by fecundity selection, variation in SSD was not dependent on either the allometric scaling of reproductive energy output or fecundity in female fish. Instead, systematic patterns based on habitat and life-history characteristics associated with varying degrees of male–male competition and paternal care strongly suggest that adaptive variation in SSD is driven by the intensity of sexual selection for increased male size.


Author(s):  
Rachael Y. Dudaniec ◽  
Alexander R. Carey ◽  
Erik I. Svensson ◽  
Bengt Hansson ◽  
Chuan Ji Yong ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (9) ◽  
pp. 20210251
Author(s):  
Tim Janicke ◽  
Salomé Fromonteil

Sexual selection is often considered as a critical evolutionary force promoting sexual size dimorphism (SSD) in animals. However, empirical evidence for a positive relationship between sexual selection on males and male-biased SSD received mixed support depending on the studied taxonomic group and on the method used to quantify sexual selection. Here, we present a meta-analytic approach accounting for phylogenetic non-independence to test how standardized metrics of the opportunity and strength of pre-copulatory sexual selection relate to SSD across a broad range of animal taxa comprising up to 95 effect sizes from 59 species. We found that SSD based on length measurements was correlated with the sex difference in the opportunity for sexual selection but showed a weak and statistically non-significant relationship with the sex difference in the Bateman gradient. These findings suggest that pre-copulatory sexual selection plays a limited role for the evolution of SSD in a broad phylogenetic context.


2007 ◽  
Vol 274 (1628) ◽  
pp. 2971-2979 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Dale ◽  
Peter O Dunn ◽  
Jordi Figuerola ◽  
Terje Lislevand ◽  
Tamás Székely ◽  
...  

In 1950, Rensch first described that in groups of related species, sexual size dimorphism is more pronounced in larger species. This widespread and fundamental allometric relationship is now commonly referred to as ‘Rensch's rule’. However, despite numerous recent studies, we still do not have a general explanation for this allometry. Here we report that patterns of allometry in over 5300 bird species demonstrate that Rensch's rule is driven by a correlated evolutionary change in females to directional sexual selection on males. First, in detailed multivariate analysis, the strength of sexual selection was, by far, the strongest predictor of allometry. This was found to be the case even after controlling for numerous potential confounding factors, such as overall size, degree of ornamentation, phylogenetic history and the range and degree of size dimorphism. Second, in groups where sexual selection is stronger in females, allometry consistently goes in the opposite direction to Rensch's rule. Taken together, these results provide the first clear solution to the long-standing evolutionary problem of allometry for sexual size dimorphism: sexual selection causes size dimorphism to correlate with species size.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document