2004EvolutionRequires access

SEXUAL CONFLICT AND SEXUAL SELECTION: LOST IN THE CHASE

Göran Arnqvist

Open publisher page 77 citations

Abstract

The emergent field of evolutionary biology that studies disparities between the evolutionary interests of alleles expressed in the two sexes, or sexual conflict, promises to offer novel insights into male-female coevolution and speciation. Our theoretical understanding of basic concepts is, however, still incomplete. In a recent perspective paper, Pizzari and Snook provided a framework for understanding sexually antagonistic coevolution and for distinguishing this process from other models of male-female coevolution and suggested an experimental protocol to test for sexually antagonistic coevolution. Here, I show that the framework is flawed, primarily because it is built upon the mistaken assumption that male and female fitness can evolve independently. Further, while the empirical strategy advocated has indeed offered important insights in the past, it does not allow unambiguous discrimination between competing hypotheses.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The emergent field of evolutionary biology that studies disparities between the evolutionary interests of alleles expressed in the two sexes, or sexual conflict, promises to offer novel insights into male-female coevolution and speciation. Our theoretical understanding of basic concepts is, however, still incomplete. In a recent perspective paper, Pizzari and Snook provided a framework for understanding sexually antagonistic coevolution and for distinguishing this process from other models of male-female coevolution and suggested an experimental protocol to test for sexually antagonistic coevolution. Here, I show that the framework is flawed, primarily because it is built upon the mistaken assumption that male and female fitness can evolve independently. Further, while the empirical strategy advocated has indeed offered important insights in the past, it does not allow unambiguous discrimination between competing hypotheses.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 77 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The emergent field of evolutionary biology that studies disparities between the evolutionary interests of alleles expressed in the two sexes, or sexual conflict, promises to offer novel insights into male-female coevolution and speciation. Our theoretical understanding of basic concepts is, however, still incomplete. In a recent perspective paper, Pizzari and Snook provided a framework for understanding sexually antagonistic coevolution and for distinguishing this process from other models of male-female coevolution and suggested an experimental protocol to test for sexually antagonistic coevolution. Here, I show that the framework is flawed, primarily because it is built upon the mistaken assumption that male and female fitness can evolve independently. Further, while the empirical strategy advocated has indeed offered important insights in the past, it does not allow unambiguous discrimination between competing hypotheses.

Key concepts: Coevolution, Biology, Antagonistic Coevolution, Sexual conflict, Sexual selection, Evolutionary biology, Perspective (graphical), Selection (genetic algorithm)

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
SEXUAL CONFLICT AND SEXUAL SELECTION: LOST IN THE CHASE — Research Paper | ScholarLens