Home

About

Advanced Search

Browse by Discipline

Scientific Societies

E-print Alerts

Add E-prints

E-print Network
FAQHELPSITE MAPCONTACT US


  Advanced Search  

 
Nature Macmillan Publishers Ltd 1998 Comparative evidence
 

Summary: Nature © Macmillan Publishers Ltd 1998
8
Comparative evidence
for the evolution of genitalia
by sexual selection
Go¨ ran Arnqvist
Department of Animal Ecology, University of Umea°, S-901 87 Umea°, Sweden
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Rapid divergent evolution of male genitalia is one of the most
general evolutionary trends in animals with internal fertilization;
the shapes of genital traits often provide the only reliable char-
acters for species identification1
. Yet the evolutionary processes
responsible for this pattern remain obscure. The long-standing
lock-and-key hypothesis, still popular among taxonomists, sug-
gests that genitalia evolve by pre-insemination hybridization
avoidance; that is, hybrid inferiority drives the evolution of
male genitalia with a proper mechanical fit to female genitalia.
The sexual selection hypothesis2,3
, in contrast, proposes that

  

Source: Arnqvist, Göran - Department of Animal Ecology, Uppsala Universitet

 

Collections: Environmental Sciences and Ecology