The ecological stage maintains preference differentiation and promotes speciation

Sexual selection and speciation in the Anthropocene

Anthropogenic change threatens global biodiversity by causing severe ecological disturbance and extinction. Here, we consider the effects of anthropogenic change on one process that generates biodiversity. Sexual selection (a potent evolutionary force and driver of speciation) is highly sensitive to the environment and, thus, vulnerable to anthropogenic ecological change. Anthropogenic alterations to sexual display and mate preference can make it harder to distinguish between conspecific and heterospecific mates or can weaken divergence via sexual selection, leading to higher rates of hybridization and biodiversity loss. Occasionally, anthropogenically altered sexual selection can abet diversification, but this appears less likely than biodiversity loss. In our rapidly changing world, a full understanding of sexual selection and speciation requires a global change perspective.

Evolution of choosiness dictates whether search costs of mate choice enhance speciation by sexual selection

The role of sexual selection in speciation is implicated in both empirical case studies and larger comparative works. However, sexual selection faces two major problems in driving speciation. First, because females with novel preferences search for their initially rare males, search costs are expected to curtail initial sexual divergence. Second, if these populations come back into sympatry, sexual divergence may be erased due to hybridization. A major goal is to understand which conditions increase the likelihood of overcoming these problems. Here we generated a diploid population genetic model of how female search costs and evolution of female 'choosiness' (i.e. preference strength) interact to drive speciation in allopatry and secondary contact. We studied the model using numerical simulations in the context of two different male traits, ecologically 'arbitrary' versus 'magic' traits. First, in allopatry, without female search costs only minor and fluctuating sexual isolation evolved. In contrast, with female search costs, sexual isolation was highly curtailed with arbitrary male traits but was greatly facilitated with magic traits. However, because search costs selected for reduced choosiness, sexual isolation with magic traits was eventually eroded, the rate determined by the genetic architecture of choosiness. These factors also played a key role in secondary contact; with evolvable choosiness and female search costs, pure sexual selection models collapsed upon secondary contact. However, when we added selection against hybrids (i.e. reinforcement) to this model, we found that speciation could be maintained under a wide range of conditions with arbitrary male traits, but not with magic male traits. This surprisingly suggests that arbitrary male traits are in some cases more likely to aid speciation than magic male traits. We discuss these findings and relate them to empirical literature on female choosiness within species and in hybrids.