Predicting the direction of sexual selection

By Kokko, Monaghan. 2001

283 citations recorded by the source corpus.

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

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e332e603260b67af11b305553a7e18fa6596a557

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

In Gender Studies

Citations in the corpus

Parental investment, sexual selection and sex ratios (2008, methodology): “…an illuminating example and then discuss why changes in the OSR are more likely to affect sex roles in the short term than the costs of breeding, even though the latter are predicted to have a major effect on the long-term evolution of the direction of sexual selection (Kokko & Monaghan, 2001).”
The evolution of mutual ornamentation (2007, background): “On the other hand, high costs of choice and poor information will hamper mutual choice (Johnstone et al. 1996; Johnstone 1997; Kokko & Monaghan 2001).”
Operational sex ratio and alternative reproductive behaviours in the European bitterling, Rhodeus sericeus (2003, background): “Recently Kokko and Monaghan (2001) and Kokko and Johnstone (2002) have introduced a life history perspective on OSR to include the costs of breeding, mate quality variation and parental investment in predicting the direction of sexual selection.”
The evolution of prudent choice (2005, background): “Although this is a relatively little studied scenario (Kokko and Monaghan, 2001; Fawcett and Johnstone, 2003; Härdling et al., 2004), there is increasing recognition that male mate choice plays a role in shaping mating systems (Riechert and Singer, 1995; Amundsen and Forsgren, 2001, 2003; Bondurians”
Unifying and Testing Models of Sexual Selection (2006, background): “Despite a female-biased OSR, males may still compete more intensely for mates if breeding is costlier for females (Kokko & Monaghan 2001, equation 4).”
Mutual ornamentation, sexual selection, and social dominance in the black swan (2004, background): “The direction of sexual selection depends on the relative roles of the sexes in parental care (Kokko and Monaghan, 2001; Parker and Simmons, 1996; Trivers, 1972).”
Evolution of female choosiness and mating frequency: effects of mating cost, density and sex ratio (2012, unknown): “This reinforces the idea that mating cost is a major determinant in the evolution of mating systems (Kokko & Monaghan 2001).”
Sperm competition, male prudence and sperm-limited females (2002, unknown): “[49], [50]].”
Male mate choice: why sequential choice can make its evolution difficult (2010, background): “This can take the form of high mating effort (e.g. male-driven monogamy, Segoli et al. 2006; Fromhage et al. 2008) as well as not rejecting low-profit opportunities (Shelly & Bailey 1992; Kokko & Monaghan 2001; Kasumovic et al. 2007; Reading & Backwell 2007; Jennions & Kokko, in press).”
Lonely hearts or sex in the city? Density-dependent effects in mating systems (2006, background): “…encounter rates generally predict that females become less selective when mate availability is low (Hubbell & Johnson 1987; Crowley et al. 1991; Kokko & Monaghan 2001; Härdling & Kaitala 2005; Kokko &Mappes 2005), yet few studies have predicted the net effect on the rate of multiple mating…”
Female American goldfinches use carotenoid-based bill coloration to signal status (2009, background): “Furthermore, the frequent flocking behavior and lack of resource-based territoriality in this species should lead to high encounter rates with potential partners, which would reduce the costs of evaluating potential mates and promote male mate choice (Kokko and Monaghan 2001; Kokko and Johnstone 200”