Author
Abstract
The adaptive significance of female selection of copulation partners remains unresolved, particularly in polygamous species where males do not provide paternal care. In these species the possibility that direct benefits other than paternal care may play an important role in the evolution of female choice has received little attention. I tested whether direct benefits are associated with female choice in the polygamous feral fowl, Gallus g. domesticus, where females prefer socially dominant copulation partners and males do not care for the young but do provide females with three commodities: food, vigilance, and sperm. I used a combination of empirical and experimental data to show that male propensity to offer food and vigilance, but not sperm, was positively associated with male social status, suggesting that the provision of these resources may be costly and condition dependent in males. Copulation success was correlated with male status but not with the number of feedings a female received from a male, indicating that a female preferred dominant partners that in general provided any female with more food, rather than partners that provided only her with more food, consistent with the idea that females may use male resource provisioning as a proximate mechanism to assess male condition. Together, these results indicate that male resources provisioning is (1) tightly linked to male social status, (2) a potential indicator of male condition and possibly genetic quality, and (3) a potential criterion for females to select dominant partners, thus playing an important role in the evolution of partner choice even in polygamous species lacking paternal care. Copyright 2003.
Suggested Citation
Tommaso Pizzari, 2003.
"Food, vigilance, and sperm: the role of male direct benefits in the evolution of female preference in a polygamous bird,"
Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 14(5), pages 593-601, September.
Handle:
RePEc:oup:beheco:v:14:y:2003:i:5:p:593-601
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:5:p:593-601. 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.