A reexamination of theoretical arguments that indirect selection on mate preference is likely to be weaker than direct selection

Abstract

Abstract Female preference for male ornaments or displays can evolve by indirect selection resulting from genetic benefits of mate choices, or by direct selection resulting from nongenetic benefits or selection on sensory systems occurring in other contexts. In an influential paper, Kirkpatrick and Barton used a good‐genes model and evolutionary rates estimated from the fossil record to conclude that indirect selection on preference is likely to be weak compared to typical strengths of direct selection. More recent authors have extrapolated from Kirkpatrick and Barton's conclusions to suggest that the presence of preference‐trait genetic correlations in equations for indirect but not direct selection gives a purely theoretical basis to the conclusion that the former is likely to be weaker than the latter. Here, I challenge these views, and argue that the relative importance of direct and indirect selection on preference is an empirical issue that defies simple generalizations. First, I show that Kirkpatrick and Barton based their conclusion on a questionable claim about typical rates of evolution due to direct selection. Second, I argue that claiming that direct selection on preference is stronger than indirect selection because only equations for the latter contain a genetic correlation mistakes the mathematical simplicity with which direct selection is usually represented for evidence regarding its magnitude. By comparing a simple equation for the selection response of preference caused by somatic (“direct”) benefits to Kirkpatrick and Barton's result for the response to indirect selection, I show that indirect selection on preference is not inherently weaker than direct selection. I also point out an important but overlooked reason why selection on preference under the sensory bias hypothesis can be expected to be less effective in the long run than that from either somatic or genetic benefits of mate choices.

Keywords

• Evolutionary theory
• genetic correlation
• linkage disequilibrium
• models
• natural selection
• quantitative genetics