Widespread loss of sexually selected traits: how the peacock lost its spots

By John J. Wiens. 2001

315 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/1997454cfa1b1eb2f5857f6c4dedd2cb2daf81d9

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Peahens do not prefer peacocks with more elaborate trains (2008, background): “On the other hand, females could shift their attention from obsolete signals to more informative signals (e.g. Møller & Pomiankowski 1993; Holland & Rice 1998; Wiens 2001), as we observed peahens exercising active best-of-N choice, presumably on some trait other than the male’s train.”
Patterns, mechanisms, and functions of translation regulation in mammalian spermatogenic cells (2004, background): “Since extreme male traits have costs and are dependent on the vagaries of female preference, they are also very susceptible to being lost from populations (Wiens, 2001).”
Sexual selection in females (2009, background): “…studies indicate that sex-linked modification of the expression of ornaments is more common than sex-linked inheritance of ornament genes (Wiens 2001; Emlen et al. 2005), suggesting that explanations of this kind are unlikely to account for the maintenance of secondary sexual characters…”
Predator exposure alters female mate choice in the green swordtail (2003, background): “In species in which such biases cannot be modulated, the bias may be selected against, providing a potential solution to the puzzle as to why sexually selected traits are commonly lost (Wiens, 2001).”
Mutual ornamentation, sexual selection, and social dominance in the black swan (2004, background): “Furthermore, recent phylogenetic work has demonstrated that evolutionary transitions between dimorphism and monomorphism have occurred frequently and in both directions (Wiens, 2001), suggesting that such changes are relatively unconstrained by genetic correlations.”
Compensatory traits and the evolution of male ornaments (2011, background): “We note that there are cases where the evolution of male and female ornaments are due to selective advantages for both sexes (e.g., Kraaijeveld et al., 2007; Simmons & Emlen, 2008) and that sexual dimorphism can result from gains and losses of male and female ornaments (e.g., Wiens, 2001).”
The evolution of mutual ornamentation (2007, background): “Phylogenetic studies have shown that this predicted pattern of a secondary gain of an ornament in females that is already present in males is common (reviewed in Wiens 2001).”
Lost along the way: the significance of evolution in reverse (2003, background): “Evolution in reverse is a widespread phenomenon in biology; however, many researchers are only just beginning to take notice of the significance and prevalence of trait loss and/or simplification [ 2 ].”
Intralocus Sexual Conflict (2009, background): “On top of that comes the lability of sexual selection, which may induce inherently variable sexually antagonistic selection pressures (Rice & Holland 1997; Wiens 2001; Ranz et al. 2003).”
Body size, male combat and the evolution of sexual dimorphism in eublepharid geckos (Squamata: Eublepharidae) (2002, background): “It predicts a correlation between gains/losses of sexually selected traits and major forms of competition among males (Wiens, 2001).”