The opportunity for sexual selection: Not mismeasured, just misunderstood

A. H. Krakauer, M. S. Webster, E. H. Duval, A. G. Jones, Stephen M Shuster

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

72 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Evolutionary biologists have developed several indices, such as selection gradients (β) and the opportunity for sexual selection (I s), to quantify the actual and/or potential strength of sexual selection acting in natural or experimental populations. In a recent paper, Klug et al. (J. Evol. Biol.23, 2010, 447) contend that selection gradients are the only legitimate metric for quantifying sexual selection. They argue that I s and similar mating-system-based metrics provide unpredictable results, which may be uncorrelated with selection acting on a trait, and should therefore be abandoned. We find this view short-sighted and argue that the choice of metric should be governed by the research question at hand. We describe insights that measures such as the opportunity for selection can provide and also argue that Klug et al. have overstated the problems with this approach while glossing over similar issues with the interpretation of selection gradients. While no metric perfectly characterizes sexual selection in all circumstances, thoughtful application of existing measures has been and continues to be informative in evolutionary studies.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)2064-2071
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Evolutionary Biology
Volume24
Issue number9
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 2011

Fingerprint

sexual selection
mating systems
biologists
hands
reproductive strategy

Keywords

  • Bateman gradient
  • Mating system
  • Operational sex ratio
  • Selection gradient

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

Cite this

The opportunity for sexual selection : Not mismeasured, just misunderstood. / Krakauer, A. H.; Webster, M. S.; Duval, E. H.; Jones, A. G.; Shuster, Stephen M.

In: Journal of Evolutionary Biology, Vol. 24, No. 9, 09.2011, p. 2064-2071.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Krakauer, A. H. ; Webster, M. S. ; Duval, E. H. ; Jones, A. G. ; Shuster, Stephen M. / The opportunity for sexual selection : Not mismeasured, just misunderstood. In: Journal of Evolutionary Biology. 2011 ; Vol. 24, No. 9. pp. 2064-2071.
@article{d4c3d20455284d0da07aae138e97db97,
title = "The opportunity for sexual selection: Not mismeasured, just misunderstood",
abstract = "Evolutionary biologists have developed several indices, such as selection gradients (β) and the opportunity for sexual selection (I s), to quantify the actual and/or potential strength of sexual selection acting in natural or experimental populations. In a recent paper, Klug et al. (J. Evol. Biol.23, 2010, 447) contend that selection gradients are the only legitimate metric for quantifying sexual selection. They argue that I s and similar mating-system-based metrics provide unpredictable results, which may be uncorrelated with selection acting on a trait, and should therefore be abandoned. We find this view short-sighted and argue that the choice of metric should be governed by the research question at hand. We describe insights that measures such as the opportunity for selection can provide and also argue that Klug et al. have overstated the problems with this approach while glossing over similar issues with the interpretation of selection gradients. While no metric perfectly characterizes sexual selection in all circumstances, thoughtful application of existing measures has been and continues to be informative in evolutionary studies.",
keywords = "Bateman gradient, Mating system, Operational sex ratio, Selection gradient",
author = "Krakauer, {A. H.} and Webster, {M. S.} and Duval, {E. H.} and Jones, {A. G.} and Shuster, {Stephen M}",
year = "2011",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1111/j.1420-9101.2011.02317.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "24",
pages = "2064--2071",
journal = "Journal of Evolutionary Biology",
issn = "1010-061X",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The opportunity for sexual selection

T2 - Not mismeasured, just misunderstood

AU - Krakauer, A. H.

AU - Webster, M. S.

AU - Duval, E. H.

AU - Jones, A. G.

AU - Shuster, Stephen M

PY - 2011/9

Y1 - 2011/9

N2 - Evolutionary biologists have developed several indices, such as selection gradients (β) and the opportunity for sexual selection (I s), to quantify the actual and/or potential strength of sexual selection acting in natural or experimental populations. In a recent paper, Klug et al. (J. Evol. Biol.23, 2010, 447) contend that selection gradients are the only legitimate metric for quantifying sexual selection. They argue that I s and similar mating-system-based metrics provide unpredictable results, which may be uncorrelated with selection acting on a trait, and should therefore be abandoned. We find this view short-sighted and argue that the choice of metric should be governed by the research question at hand. We describe insights that measures such as the opportunity for selection can provide and also argue that Klug et al. have overstated the problems with this approach while glossing over similar issues with the interpretation of selection gradients. While no metric perfectly characterizes sexual selection in all circumstances, thoughtful application of existing measures has been and continues to be informative in evolutionary studies.

AB - Evolutionary biologists have developed several indices, such as selection gradients (β) and the opportunity for sexual selection (I s), to quantify the actual and/or potential strength of sexual selection acting in natural or experimental populations. In a recent paper, Klug et al. (J. Evol. Biol.23, 2010, 447) contend that selection gradients are the only legitimate metric for quantifying sexual selection. They argue that I s and similar mating-system-based metrics provide unpredictable results, which may be uncorrelated with selection acting on a trait, and should therefore be abandoned. We find this view short-sighted and argue that the choice of metric should be governed by the research question at hand. We describe insights that measures such as the opportunity for selection can provide and also argue that Klug et al. have overstated the problems with this approach while glossing over similar issues with the interpretation of selection gradients. While no metric perfectly characterizes sexual selection in all circumstances, thoughtful application of existing measures has been and continues to be informative in evolutionary studies.

KW - Bateman gradient

KW - Mating system

KW - Operational sex ratio

KW - Selection gradient

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79960786534&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79960786534&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1420-9101.2011.02317.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1420-9101.2011.02317.x

M3 - Article

C2 - 21635605

AN - SCOPUS:79960786534

VL - 24

SP - 2064

EP - 2071

JO - Journal of Evolutionary Biology

JF - Journal of Evolutionary Biology

SN - 1010-061X

IS - 9

ER -