Degree of anisogamy is unrelated to the intensity of sexual selection

Abstract Males and females often display different behaviours and, in the context of reproduction, these behaviours are labelled sex roles. The Darwin–Bateman paradigm argues that the root of these differences is anisogamy (i.e., differences in size and/or function of gametes between the sexes) that...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Judit Mokos, István Scheuring, András Liker, Robert P. Freckleton, Tamás Székely
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Nature Portfolio 2021
Materias:	Medicine R Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/3ac657237c984eb7b9e2b3232ac97213
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:3ac657237c984eb7b9e2b3232ac97213
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:3ac657237c984eb7b9e2b3232ac972132021-12-02T18:51:14ZDegree of anisogamy is unrelated to the intensity of sexual selection10.1038/s41598-021-98616-22045-2322https://doaj.org/article/3ac657237c984eb7b9e2b3232ac972132021-09-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-98616-2https://doaj.org/toc/2045-2322Abstract Males and females often display different behaviours and, in the context of reproduction, these behaviours are labelled sex roles. The Darwin–Bateman paradigm argues that the root of these differences is anisogamy (i.e., differences in size and/or function of gametes between the sexes) that leads to biased sexual selection, and sex differences in parental care and body size. This evolutionary cascade, however, is contentious since some of the underpinning assumptions have been questioned. Here we investigate the relationships between anisogamy, sexual size dimorphism, sex difference in parental care and intensity of sexual selection using phylogenetic comparative analyses of 64 species from a wide range of animal taxa. The results question the first step of the Darwin–Bateman paradigm, as the extent of anisogamy does not appear to predict the intensity of sexual selection. The only significant predictor of sexual selection is the relative inputs of males and females into the care of offspring. We propose that ecological factors, life-history and demography have more substantial impacts on contemporary sex roles than the differences of gametic investments between the sexes.Judit MokosIstván ScheuringAndrás LikerRobert P. FreckletonTamás SzékelyNature PortfolioarticleMedicineRScienceQENScientific Reports, Vol 11, Iss 1, Pp 1-11 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R Science Q
spellingShingle	Medicine R Science Q Judit Mokos István Scheuring András Liker Robert P. Freckleton Tamás Székely Degree of anisogamy is unrelated to the intensity of sexual selection
description	Abstract Males and females often display different behaviours and, in the context of reproduction, these behaviours are labelled sex roles. The Darwin–Bateman paradigm argues that the root of these differences is anisogamy (i.e., differences in size and/or function of gametes between the sexes) that leads to biased sexual selection, and sex differences in parental care and body size. This evolutionary cascade, however, is contentious since some of the underpinning assumptions have been questioned. Here we investigate the relationships between anisogamy, sexual size dimorphism, sex difference in parental care and intensity of sexual selection using phylogenetic comparative analyses of 64 species from a wide range of animal taxa. The results question the first step of the Darwin–Bateman paradigm, as the extent of anisogamy does not appear to predict the intensity of sexual selection. The only significant predictor of sexual selection is the relative inputs of males and females into the care of offspring. We propose that ecological factors, life-history and demography have more substantial impacts on contemporary sex roles than the differences of gametic investments between the sexes.
format	article
author	Judit Mokos István Scheuring András Liker Robert P. Freckleton Tamás Székely
author_facet	Judit Mokos István Scheuring András Liker Robert P. Freckleton Tamás Székely
author_sort	Judit Mokos
title	Degree of anisogamy is unrelated to the intensity of sexual selection
title_short	Degree of anisogamy is unrelated to the intensity of sexual selection
title_full	Degree of anisogamy is unrelated to the intensity of sexual selection
title_fullStr	Degree of anisogamy is unrelated to the intensity of sexual selection
title_full_unstemmed	Degree of anisogamy is unrelated to the intensity of sexual selection
title_sort	degree of anisogamy is unrelated to the intensity of sexual selection
publisher	Nature Portfolio
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/3ac657237c984eb7b9e2b3232ac97213
work_keys_str_mv	AT juditmokos degreeofanisogamyisunrelatedtotheintensityofsexualselection AT istvanscheuring degreeofanisogamyisunrelatedtotheintensityofsexualselection AT andrasliker degreeofanisogamyisunrelatedtotheintensityofsexualselection AT robertpfreckleton degreeofanisogamyisunrelatedtotheintensityofsexualselection AT tamasszekely degreeofanisogamyisunrelatedtotheintensityofsexualselection
_version_	1718377441061240832

Degree of anisogamy is unrelated to the intensity of sexual selection

Ejemplares similares