Author
Listed:
- Susan E. Ptak
- Michael Lachmann
Abstract
The polygyny threshold model states that if costs incurred are less than the benefits gained from mating polygynously in terms of breeding-situation quality, then polygyny is favored and could evolve. We constructed mathematical models and computer simulations to evaluate this hypothesis. In the basic model, there is a single locus with two alleles, which regulates whether the female is receptive to polygyny. There are two breeding situations of differing quality on which males randomly assort. Females then select a mate based on the associated breeding situation and whether the male already has mates. This basic model is extended mathematically to include a cost for the initial female of a male with multiple mates and again to include gene expression in males. The computer simulations extend the basic model to multiple loci and alleles and to multiple breeding situations. The results presented here suggest that the polygyny threshold model is valid in a population genetic context: if the fitness of females that actually mate polygynously is greater than the fitness of monogamous females on poorer breeding situations, polygyny evolves. However, this approach reveals interesting dynamics not apparent from the verbal model. If the trait is expressed in males and females, then polygyny can evolve even if females mating polygynously have a lower fitness than females mating monogamously. In the multiple breeding-situations model, the polygyny allele increases to some equilibrium value above which it experiences no selection. Surprisingly, as the cost of polygyny increases, the equilibrium frequency of the polygyny allele also increases. The difference between this evolutionary model and the ideal free distribution is discussed. Copyright 2003.
Suggested Citation
Susan E. Ptak & Michael Lachmann, 2003.
"On the evolution of polygyny: a theoretical examination of the polygyny threshold model,"
Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 14(2), pages 201-211, March.
Handle:
RePEc:oup:beheco:v:14:y:2003:i:2:p:201-211
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:14:y:2003:i:2:p:201-211. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/beheco .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.