Search

Sexually selected traits often depend on an individual’s physical condition, or otherwise indirectly reflect the ecological performance of individuals. When individuals disperse between populations that are locally adapted to different environments, their ecological performance may decline. This in turn may result in more poorly expressed sexual traits, and therefore in a lower reproductive success. Hence, sexual selection may reduce the effective gene flow between populations, and thereby maintain or even enhance population divergence. This hypothesis was published in a highly visible journal (van Doorn et al., 2009, Science). Here I review the subsequently published empirical tests of this hypothesis. I downloaded all metadata (incl. abstracts) of papers citing van Doorn et al. (2009) and read those papers that undertook relevant tests. To my surprise, only very few papers provided explicit tests of the hypothesis, this never involved plants, and only one study found support for it. While sexual selection may therefore not often reduce gene flow between locally adapted populations, some improvements to experimental design and choice of study system are noted. I therefore also provide a detailed list of suggestions for high quality tests of this hypothesis. This hopefully acts as a catalyst for more and better studies to test whether sexual and natural selection can work in synergy to reduce effective dispersal, and thereby protect and promote adaptive population divergence.

Background colour matching reduces predation risk of grasshoppers

Model details

Effect of time of day and thermal conditions on microhabitat use by grasshoppers

Male-female interactions and assortative mating

Dozens of morphologically differentiated populations, subspecies and species of crossbills (genus Loxia) exist. It has been suggested that this divergence is due to variation in the conifer cones that each population specialises upon, requiring a specific beak size to efficiently separate the cone scales. If so, apparent survival should depend on beak size. To test this hypothesis, we undertook multievent capture–recapture modelling for 6844 individuals monitored during 27 years in a Pyrenean common crossbill L. curvirostra population in a forest of mountain pine Pinus uncinata. Apparent survival was indeed related to beak width, resulting in stabilizing selection around an optimum that was close to the observed mean beak width, indicating that local crossbill beak morphology is adapted to the conifer they feed upon. Both natural selection (selective mortality) and selective emigration of maladapted individuals may explain our findings. As is often the case in capture–recapture analyses but rarely recognised, we could not formally decompose apparent survival into selective mortality versus selective permanent emigration. Nonetheless, there are several indications that selective permanent emigration should not be fully excluded. First, natural selection by itself would have to be unusually strong compared to other empirical estimates to create the observed pattern of apparent survival. Second, the observed mean beak width was a bit lower than the estimated optimum beak width. This can be explained by immigration of crossbills with smaller beaks originating from southern populations, which may subsequently have left the study area permanently in response to low food intake. This is in line with a detected transient effect in the data, yet apparently little influx from crossbills from northern Europe. When permanent emigration is phenotypically selective this will have ecological and evolutionary consequences, so this possibility deserves more attention in general. Dozens of morphologically differentiated populations, subspecies and species of crossbills (genus Loxia) exist. It has been suggested that this divergence is due to variation in the conifer cones that each population specialises upon, requiring a specific beak size to efficiently separate the cone scales. If so, apparent survival should depend on beak size. To test this hypothesis, we undertook multievent capture–recapture modelling for 6844 individuals monitored during 27 years in a Pyrenean common crossbill L. curvirostra population in a forest of mountain pine Pinus uncinata. Apparent survival was indeed related to beak width, resulting in stabilizing selection around an optimum that was close to the observed mean beak width, indicating that local crossbill beak morphology is adapted to the conifer they feed upon. Both natural selection (selective mortality) and selective emigration of maladapted individuals may explain our findings. As is often the case in capture–recapture analyses but rarely recognised, we could not formally decompose apparent survival into selective mortality versus selective permanent emigration. Nonetheless, there are several indications that selective permanent emigration should not be fully excluded. First, natural selection by itself would have to be unusually strong compared to other empirical estimates to create the observed pattern of apparent survival. Second, the observed mean beak width was a bit lower than the estimated optimum beak width. This can be explained by immigration of crossbills with smaller beaks originating from southern populations, which may subsequently have left the study area permanently in response to low food intake. This is in line with a detected transient effect in the data, yet apparently little influx from crossbills from northern Europe. When permanent emigration is phenotypically selective this will have ecological and evolutionary consequences, so this possibility deserves more attention in general. Dozens of morphologically differentiated populations, subspecies and species of crossbills (genus Loxia) exist. It has been suggested that this divergence is due to variation in the conifer cones that each population specialises upon, requiring a specific beak size to efficiently separate the cone scales. If so, apparent survival should depend on beak size. To test this hypothesis, we undertook multievent capture–recapture modelling for 6844 individuals monitored during 27 years in a Pyrenean common crossbill L. curvirostra population in a forest of mountain pine Pinus uncinata. Apparent survival was indeed related to beak width, resulting in stabilizing selection around an optimum that was close to the observed mean beak width, indicating that local crossbill beak morphology is adapted to the conifer they feed upon. Both natural selection (selective mortality) and selective emigration of maladapted individuals may explain our findings. As is often the case in capture–recapture analyses but rarely recognised, we could not formally decompose apparent survival into selective mortality versus selective permanent emigration. Nonetheless, there are several indications that selective permanent emigration should not be fully excluded. First, natural selection by itself would have to be unusually strong compared to other empirical estimates to create the observed pattern of apparent survival. Second, the observed mean beak width was a bit lower than the estimated optimum beak width. This can be explained by immigration of crossbills with smaller beaks originating from southern populations, which may subsequently have left the study area permanently in response to low food intake. This is in line with a detected transient effect in the data, yet apparently little influx from crossbills from northern Europe. When permanent emigration is phenotypically selective this will have ecological and evolutionary consequences, so this possibility deserves more attention in general.