Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-cphqk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-13T19:24:31.733Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mate Choice and Null Models

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Karen Kovaka
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Biologists have proposed a variety of explanations for extravagant sexual displays, and controversies over explanations define the history of sexual selection research. Recently, Richard Prum has defended Darwin’s idea that the evolution of sexual displays is driven by arbitrary and nonadaptive preferences of potential mates. Prum argues that this explanation should be the null model for sexual selection research. I show that if we adopted Prum’s proposal, the inferences we could be justified in making are more modest than he claims. I also discuss problems with estimating model parameters that at present prevent his proposal from being useful in practice.

Type
Biological Sciences and Medicine
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 87 , Issue 5: PSA 2018 - Proceedings of the 2018 biennial meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association. Part II Symposia Papers , December 2020 , pp. 1096 - 1106
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

†

I am grateful to Jonathan Birch, Tom Rowe, and an anonymous referee for their insightful comments on draft versions of this article.

References

Andersson, Malte B. 1994. Sexual Selection. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bausman, William C. 2018. “Modeling: Neutral, Null, and Baseline.” Philosophy of Science 85 (4): 594–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bausman, William C., and Halina, Marta. 2018. “Not Null Enough: Pseudo-Null Hypotheses in Community Ecology and Comparative Psychology.” Biology and Philosophy 33 (3–4): 30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bostwick, Kimberly S., Riccio, Mark L., and Humphries, Julian M. 2012. “Massive, Solidified Bone in the Wing of a Volant Courting Bird.” Biology letters 8 (5): 760–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fuller, Rebecca C., Houle, David, and Travis, Joseph. 2005. “Sensory Bias as an Explanation for the Evolution of Mate Preferences.” American Naturalist 166 (4): 437–46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Godfrey-Smith, P. 1994. “Of Nulls and Norms.” In PSA 1994: Proceedings of the 1994 Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, vol. 1, 280–90. East Lansing, MI: Philosophy of Science Association.Google Scholar
Godfrey-Smith, P. 2003. “Goodman’s Problem and Scientific Methodology.” Journal of Philosophy 100 (11): 573–90.Google Scholar
Kokko, Hanna. 2001. “Fisherian and ‘Good Genes’ Benefits of Mate Choice: How (Not) to Distinguish between Them.” Ecology Letters 4 (4): 322–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kokko, Hanna, Brooks, Robert, McNamara, John M., and Houston, Alasdair I. 2002. “The Sexual Selection Continuum.” Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 269 (1498): 1331–40.Google Scholar
Kokko, Hanna, Jennions, Michael D., and Brooks, Robert. 2006. “Unifying and Testing Models of Sexual Selection.” Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 37:43–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linville, Susan U., Jennions, Randall, and Brooks, Robert. 1998. “Plumage Brightness as an Indicator of Parental Care in Northern Cardinals.” Animal Behaviour 55 (1): 119–27.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Patricelli, Gail L., Hebets, Eileen A., and Mendelson, Tamra C. 2019. Review of The Evolution of Beauty: How Darwin’s Forgotten Theory of Mate Choice Shapes the Animal World—and Us, by Richard Prum. Evolution 73 (1): 115–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prum, Richard O. 2010. “The Lande-Kirkpatrick Mechanism Is the Null Model of Evolution by Intersexual Selection: Implications for Meaning, Honesty, and Design in Intersexual Signals.” Evolution: International Journal of Organic Evolution 64 (11): 3085–100.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Prum, Richard O. 2017. The Evolution of Beauty: How Darwin’s Forgotten Theory of Mate Choice Shapes the Animal World—and Us. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Rodd, F. Helen, Hughes, Kimberly A., Grether, Gregory F., and Baril, Colette T. 2002. “A Possible Non-sexual Origin of Mate Preference: Are Male Guppies Mimicking Fruit?” Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 269 (1490): 475–81.Google Scholar
Török, János, Hegyi, Gergely, and Zsolt Garamszegi, László. 2003. “Depigmented Wing Patch Size Is a Condition-Dependent Indicator of Viability in Male Collared Flycatchers.” Behavioral Ecology 14 (3): 382–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar