Multiple sexual ornaments

Many species have multiple sexual ornaments, that is, females select mating partners using several cues instead of only one cue. Whereas this phenomenon is self-evident and hence long recognized by biologists, adaptive explanations of why females use several instead of only one signal have been formulated relatively recently. Several hypotheses exist, but mutually exclusive tests are still lacking.

Hypotheses

There are several hypotheses that attempt to explain why a male would have multiple sexual ornaments.

Multiple messages hypothesis

The multiple message hypothesis ^[1] states that different ornaments signal different properties of an individual's overall quality. Models support the possibility that this hypothesis is evolutionarily stable ^[2] but empirical tests are lacking.

Some ornaments represent long-term or short-term changes in overall condition. Elegant plumes in a bird or antlers in a deer grown once a year could signal the overall condition of an animal during long the period of growth; this is thus an example of a long-term change ^[3]. Secondary characters like the inflatable bare patches of skin on a grouse species or the colorful patches of skin in a primate species could represent short-term changes ^[4].

Redundant signals hypothesis

The redundant signal hypothesis ^[5] states that each character can only best show partial representation of overall condition. If each ornament reflected the male's quality with a certain error, then mate choice based on a single trait would lead a female to select a male in poor condition rather than one in great condition.Thus, a female ought to look at multiple sexual traits of a male if she wants to get an overall view of the male's quality. There has been some empirical support of this hypothesis ^[6].

Unreliable signals hypothesis

The unreliable signal hypothesis ^[1] suggests that some signals are unreliable indicators of overall male quality.Therefore a female should look at multiple traits because one trait could be misleading; it could be cheaper to produce in terms of energy usage. There is some support for this hypothesis ^[7].

Sexual interference hypothesis

The sexual interference hypothesis^[8] proposes that additional male signals evolve as a way for males to hinder female mate choice by interfering with the propagation and reception of other males’ sexual signals. Females respond by evolving the ability to glean meaningful information from signals despite males’ attempts at obfuscation. In turn, males respond by producing better interference signals and signals that are not so easily blocked. This process increases the costs of assessment for females and the costs of signal production for males, and leads to a temporary equilibrium of honest advertising via multiple signals. This hypothesis remains untested.

References

1. ^ ^{a b} Møller, A. P., and A. Pomiankoski. 1993. Why have birds got multiple sexual ornaments? Behavioral Ecology & Sociobiology 32:167-176.
2. ^ Johnstone, Rufus A. (1996), "Multiple Displays in animal communication: 'backup signals' and 'multiple messages.'", Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences 351 (1337): 329–338, doi:10.1098/rstb.1996.0026 .
3. ^ Moller, A. P.; Pomiankowski, Andrew (1993), "Why have birds got multiple sexual ornaments?", Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 32 (3): 167–176, doi:10.1007/BF00173774 .
4. ^ Changizi, Mark A.; Zhang, Qiong; Shimojo, Shinsuke (2006), "Bare skin, blood and the evolution of primate colour vision", Biology Letters 2 (2): 217–221, doi:10.1098/rsbl.2006.0440, PMC 1618887, PMID 17148366, http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=1618887 .
5. ^ Zuk, M., J. D. Ligon, and R. Thornhill. 1992. Effects of experimental manipulations of male secondary sex characters on mate preference in red jungle fowl. Animal Behavior 44:999-1006.
6. ^ Jawor, Jodie M.; Breitwisch, Randall (2004), "Multiple Ornaments in male northern cardinals, Cardinalis Cardinalis, as indicators of condition", Ethology 110 (2): 113–126, doi:10.1111/j.1439-0310.2003.00962.x .
7. ^ Omland, K. E. (1996), "Female mallard mating preferences for multiple male ornaments", Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 39 (6): 353–360, doi:10.1007/s002650050301 .
8. ^ Lozano, G. A. 2009. Multiple cues in mate selection: the sexual interference hypothesis. BioScience Hypotheses 2: 37-42 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bihy.2008.09.001 [1]