Handicap principle

Last updated

The peacock tail in flight, a classic example of what Amotz Zahavi proposed was a handicapped signal of male quality Peacock Flying.jpg
The peacock tail in flight, a classic example of what Amotz Zahavi proposed was a handicapped signal of male quality

The handicap principle is a disputed hypothesis proposed by the Israeli biologist Amotz Zahavi in 1975. It is meant to explain how "signal selection" during mate choice may lead to "honest" or reliable signalling between male and female animals which have an obvious motivation to bluff or deceive each other. [2] [3] [4] The handicap principle suggests that secondary sexual characteristics are costly signals which must be reliable, as they cost the signaller resources that individuals with less of a particular trait could not afford. The handicap principle further proposes that animals of greater biological fitness signal this through handicapping behaviour, or morphology that effectively lowers overall fitness. The central idea is that sexually selected traits function like conspicuous consumption, signalling the ability to afford to squander a resource. Receivers then know that the signal indicates quality, because inferior-quality signallers are unable to produce such wastefully extravagant signals. [5] [6] [7] [8] [9]

Contents

The handicap principle is supported by game theory modelling representing situations such as nestlings begging for food, predator-deterrent signalling, and threat displays. However, honest signals are not necessarily costly, undermining the theoretical basis for the handicap principle, which remains unconfirmed by empirical evidence.

History

Origins

The handicap principle was proposed in 1975 by the Israeli biologist Amotz Zahavi. He argued that mate choice involving what he called "signal selection" would lead to "honest" or reliable signalling between male and female animals, even though they have an interest in bluffing or deceiving each other. The handicap principle asserts that secondary sexual characteristics are costly signals, which are reliable indicators of the signaller's quality, since they cost the signaller resources that lower-quality individuals could not afford. [2] [3] [10] The generality of the phenomenon is a matter of some debate and disagreement, and Zahavi's views on the scope and importance of handicaps in biology have not been accepted by the mainstream. [11] [12] Nevertheless, the idea has been very influential, with most researchers in the field believing that the theory explains some aspects of animal communication. [13] [14] [15]

Grafen's signaling game model

Graph based on Johnstone's 1997 graphical representation of a Zahavian handicap. Where C L {\displaystyle C_{L}} is cost to a low-quality signaller and C H {\displaystyle C_{H}} is cost to a high-quality signaller. Optimal signalling levels are S L * {\displaystyle S_{L}^{*}} for a low-quality signaller, and S H * {\displaystyle S_{H}^{*}} for a high-quality signaller. Handicap-signal-of-quality.png
Graph based on Johnstone's 1997 graphical representation of a Zahavian handicap. Where is cost to a low-quality signaller and is cost to a high-quality signaller. Optimal signalling levels are for a low-quality signaller, and for a high-quality signaller.

The handicap principle was initially controversial; [5] [6] [7] [8] The British biologist John Maynard Smith was a notable early critic of Zahavi's ideas. [9] [16] [17]

However, the handicap principle gained wider acceptance because it is supported by game theory models, most notably the Scottish biologist Alan Grafen's 1990 signalling game model. [1] This was essentially a rediscovery of the Canadian-American economist Michael Spence's job market signalling model, [18] where the job applicant signals their quality by declaring a costly education. In Grafen's model, the courting male's quality is signalled by investment in an extravagant trait—similar to the peacock's tail. The signal is reliable if the cost to the signaller of producing it is proportionately lower for higher-quality signallers than for lower-quality ones. [1]

A series of papers by the American biologist Thomas Getty showed that Grafen's proof of the handicap principle depends on the critical, simplifying assumption that signallers trade off costs for benefits in an additive fashion, analogous to the way humans invest money to increase income in the same currency. [19] [20] [21] [22] This is illustrated in the figures from Johnstone 1997, which show that the optimum signalling levels are different for low- and high-quality signallers. [13] The validity of the assumption that costs and benefits are additive has been contested, in its application to the evolution of sexually selected signals. It can be reasoned that since fitness depends on the production of offspring, this is a multiplicative rather than additive function of reproductive success. [23]

Further game theoretical models demonstrated the evolutionary stability of handicapped signals in nestlings' begging calls, [24] in predator-deterrent signals [25] and in threat-displays. [26] [27] In the classic handicap models of begging in game theory, all players are assumed to pay the same amount to produce a signal of a given level of intensity, but differ in the relative value of eliciting the desired response (donation) from the receiver. The hungrier the baby bird, the more food is of value to it, and the higher the optimal signalling level (the louder its chirping). [24]

Cheap talk models without handicaps

Counter-examples to handicap models predate handicap models themselves. Models of signals (such as threat displays) without any handicapping costs show that what biologists call cheap talk may be an evolutionarily stable form of communication. [28] Analysis of some begging models shows that non-communication strategies are not only evolutionarily stable, but lead to higher payoffs for both players. [29] [30] In human mate choice, mathematical analyses including Monte Carlo simulations suggest that costly traits ought to be more attractive to the other sex and much rarer than non-costly traits. [31]

It was soon discovered that honest signals need not be costly at the honest equilibrium, even under conflict of interest. This conclusion was first shown in discrete models [32] [33] and then in continuous models. [34] [35] [36] Similar results were obtained in conflict models: threat displays need not be handicaps to be honest and evolutionarily stable. [37]

Unworkable theory lacking empirical evidence

In 2015, Simon Huttegger and colleagues wrote that the distinction between "indexes" (unfakable signals) and "fakable signals", crucial to the argument for the handicap principle, is an artefact of signalling models. They demonstrated that absent that dichotomy, cost could not be the only factor controlling signalling behaviours, and that indeed it was "probably not the most important" factor acting against deception. [38]

Dustin J. Penn and Szabolcs Számadó stated in 2019 that there was still no empirical evidence for evolutionary pressure for wasteful biology or acts, and proposed that the handicap principle should be abandoned. [39]

Predictions and interpretations

Luxury cars and other "Veblen goods" may be an example of the handicap principle in humans SC06 2006 Rolls-Royce Phantom.jpg
Luxury cars and other "Veblen goods" may be an example of the handicap principle in humans

The handicap principle predicts that a sexual ornament, or any other signal such as visibly risky behavior, must be costly if it is to accurately advertise a trait of relevance to an individual with conflicting interests. Typical examples of handicapped signals include bird songs, the peacock's tail, courtship dances, and bowerbird bowers. American scientist Jared Diamond has proposed that certain risky human behaviours, such as bungee jumping, may be expressions of instincts that have evolved through the operation of the handicap principle. Zahavi has invoked the gift-giving potlatch ceremony as a human example of the handicap principle in action: the conspicuous generosity is costly. This interpretation of potlatch can be traced to Thorstein Veblen's use of the ceremony in his book Theory of the Leisure Class as an example of "conspicuous consumption". [41]

The handicap principle gains further support by providing interpretations for behaviours that fit into a single unifying gene-centered view of evolution and making earlier explanations based on group selection obsolete. A classic example is that of stotting in gazelles. This behaviour consists in the gazelle initially running slowly and jumping high when threatened by a predator such as a lion or cheetah. The explanation based on group selection was that such behaviour might be adapted to alerting other gazelle to a cheetah's presence or might be part of a collective behaviour pattern of the group of gazelle to confuse the cheetah. Instead, Zahavi proposed that each gazelle was communicating that it was a fitter individual than its fellows. [4]

Signals to members of the same species

Zahavi studied in particular the Arabian babbler, a highly social bird, with a life-length of 30 years, which appears to behave altruistically. Its helping-at-the-nest behavior, where non-parent birds assist in feeding, guarding, and caring for nestlings, often occurs among unrelated individuals. This, therefore, cannot be explained by kin selection, natural selection acting on genes that close relatives share with the altruistic individual. Zahavi reinterpreted these behaviors according to his signalling theory and its correlative, the handicap principle. The altruistic act is costly to the donor, but may improve its attractiveness to potential mates. The evolution of this condition may be explained by competitive altruism. [42] [43] [44]

French biologist Patrice David showed that in the stalk-eyed fly species Cyrtodiopsis dalmanni , genetic variation underlies the response to environmental stress, such as variable food quality, of a male sexual ornament, eye span. He showed that some male genotypes always develop large eye spans, but others reduce eye span in proportion to environmental worsening. David inferred that female mate choice yields genetic benefits for offspring. [45]

Signals to other species

Impala stotting, a behavior that may serve as a pursuit deterrence signal to predators Stotting gazelle.jpg
Impala stotting, a behavior that may serve as a pursuit deterrence signal to predators

Signals may be directed at predators, with the function of showing that pursuit will probably be unprofitable. Stotting, for instance, is a form of energetic jumping that certain gazelles do when they sight a predator. As this behavior gives no evident benefit and would seem to waste resources (diminishing the gazelle's head start if chased by the predator), it appeared likely to be selected against. However, it made sense when seen as a pursuit deterrence signal to predators. By investing a little energy to show a lion that it has the fitness necessary to avoid capture, a gazelle reduces the likelihood that it will have to evade the lion in an actual pursuit. The lion, faced with the demonstration of fitness, might decide that it would fail to catch this gazelle, and thus choose to avoid a probably wasted pursuit. The benefit to the gazelle is twofold. First, for the small amount of energy invested in the stotting, the gazelle might not have to expend the tremendous energy required to evade the lion. Second, if the lion is in fact capable of catching this gazelle, the gazelle's bluff may lead to its survival that day (in the event the bluff succeeds). [46] However, the mathematical biologist John Maynard Smith commented that other explanations were possible, such as that it was an honest signal of fitness, [47] or an honest signal that the predator had been detected, [48] and it was hard to see how stotting could be a handicap. [47]

Another example is provided by larks, some of which discourage merlins by sending a similar message: they sing while being chased, telling their predator that they will be difficult to capture. [49]

Immunocompetence handicaps

The theory of immunocompetence handicaps suggests that androgen-mediated traits accurately signal condition due to the immunosuppressive effects of androgens. [50] This immunosuppression may be either because testosterone alters the allocation of limited resources between the development of ornamental traits and other tissues, including the immune system, [51] or because heightened immune system activity has a propensity to launch autoimmune attacks against gametes, such that suppression of the immune system enhances fertility. [52] Healthy individuals can afford to suppress their immune system by raising their testosterone levels, at the same time augmenting secondary sexual traits and displays. A review of empirical studies into the various aspects of this theory found weak support. [53]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sexual selection</span> Mode of natural selection involving the choosing of and competition for mates

Sexual selection is a mechanism of evolution in which members of one biological sex choose mates of the other sex to mate with, and compete with members of the same sex for access to members of the opposite sex. These two forms of selection mean that some individuals have greater reproductive success than others within a population, for example because they are more attractive or prefer more attractive partners to produce offspring. Successful males benefit from frequent mating and monopolizing access to one or more fertile females. Females can maximise the return on the energy they invest in reproduction by selecting and mating with the best males.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Lek mating</span> Type of animal mating behaviour

A lek is an aggregation of male animals gathered to engage in competitive displays and courtship rituals, known as lekking, to entice visiting females which are surveying prospective partners with which to mate. It can also refer to a space used by displaying males to defend their own share of territory for the breeding season. A lekking species is characterised by male displays, strong female mate choice, and the conferring of indirect benefits to males and reduced costs to females. Although most prevalent among birds such as black grouse, lekking is also found in a wide range of vertebrates including some bony fish, amphibians, reptiles, mammals, and arthropods including crustaceans and insects.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fisherian runaway</span> Sexual selection mechanism

Fisherian runaway or runaway selection is a sexual selection mechanism proposed by the mathematical biologist Ronald Fisher in the early 20th century, to account for the evolution of ostentatious male ornamentation by persistent, directional female choice. An example is the colourful and elaborate peacock plumage compared to the relatively subdued peahen plumage; the costly ornaments, notably the bird's extremely long tail, appear to be incompatible with natural selection. Fisherian runaway can be postulated to include sexually dimorphic phenotypic traits such as behavior expressed by a particular sex.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Amotz Zahavi</span> Israeli evolutionary biologist (1928–2017)

Amotz Zahavi was an Israeli evolutionary biologist, a Professor in the Department of Zoology at Tel Aviv University, and one of the founders of the Society for the Protection of Nature in Israel. His main work concerned the evolution of signals, particularly those signals that are indicative of fitness, and their selection for "honesty".

<i>Journal of Theoretical Biology</i> Academic journal

The Journal of Theoretical Biology is a biweekly peer-reviewed scientific journal covering theoretical biology, as well as mathematical, computational, and statistical aspects of biology. Some research areas covered by the journal include cell biology, evolutionary biology, population genetics, morphogenesis, and immunology.

Evolutionary game theory (EGT) is the application of game theory to evolving populations in biology. It defines a framework of contests, strategies, and analytics into which Darwinian competition can be modelled. It originated in 1973 with John Maynard Smith and George R. Price's formalisation of contests, analysed as strategies, and the mathematical criteria that can be used to predict the results of competing strategies.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Signalling theory</span> Theory in evolutionary biology

Within evolutionary biology, signalling theory is a body of theoretical work examining communication between individuals, both within species and across species. The central question is when organisms with conflicting interests, such as in sexual selection, should be expected to provide honest signals rather than cheating. Mathematical models describe how signalling can contribute to an evolutionarily stable strategy.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Anisogamy</span> Sexual reproduction involving a large, female gamete and a small, male gamete

Anisogamy is a form of sexual reproduction that involves the union or fusion of two gametes that differ in size and/or form. The smaller gamete is male, a sperm cell, whereas the larger gamete is female, typically an egg cell. Anisogamy is predominant among multicellular organisms. In both plants and animals, gamete size difference is the fundamental difference between females and males.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Altruism (biology)</span> Behaviour that increases the fitness of another while decreasing the fitness of self

In biology, altruism refers to behaviour by an individual that increases the fitness of another individual while decreasing their own. Altruism in this sense is different from the philosophical concept of altruism, in which an action would only be called "altruistic" if it was done with the conscious intention of helping another. In the behavioural sense, there is no such requirement. As such, it is not evaluated in moral terms—it is the consequences of an action for reproductive fitness that determine whether the action is considered altruistic, not the intentions, if any, with which the action is performed.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Walter M. Elsasser</span> German-American physicist

Walter Maurice Elsasser was a German-born American physicist, a developer of the presently accepted dynamo theory as an explanation of the Earth's magnetism. He proposed that this magnetic field resulted from electric currents induced in the fluid outer core of the Earth. He revealed the history of the Earth's magnetic field by the study of the magnetic orientation of minerals in rocks. He is also noted for his unpublished proposal of the wave-like diffraction of electron particles by a crystal. The subsequent Davisson–Germer experiment showing this effect led to a Nobel Prize in Physics.

The green-beard effect is a thought experiment used in evolutionary biology to explain selective altruism among individuals of a species.

In evolution, cooperation is the process where groups of organisms work or act together for common or mutual benefits. It is commonly defined as any adaptation that has evolved, at least in part, to increase the reproductive success of the actor's social partners. For example, territorial choruses by male lions discourage intruders and are likely to benefit all contributors.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Stotting</span> Jumping display of quadrupeds thought to deter predators

Stotting is a behavior of quadrupeds, particularly gazelles, in which they spring into the air, lifting all four feet off the ground simultaneously. Usually, the legs are held in a relatively stiff position. Many explanations of stotting have been proposed, though for several of them there is little evidence either for or against.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Lek paradox</span> Conundrum in sexual selection behaviour

The lek paradox is a conundrum in evolutionary biology that addresses the persistence of genetic variation in male traits within lek mating systems, despite strong sexual selection through female choice. This paradox arises from the expectation that consistent female preference for particular male traits should erode genetic diversity, theoretically leading to a loss of the benefits of choice. The lek paradox challenges our understanding of how genetic variation is maintained in populations subject to intense sexual selection, particularly in species where males provide only genes to their offspring. Several hypotheses have been proposed to resolve this paradox, including the handicap principle, condition-dependent trait expression, and parasite resistance models.

Alan Grafen is a Scottish ethologist and evolutionary biologist. He currently teaches and undertakes research at St John's College, Oxford. Along with regular contributions to scientific journals, Grafen is known publicly for his work as co-editor of the 2006 festschrift Richard Dawkins: How a Scientist Changed the Way We Think, honouring the achievements of his colleague and former academic advisor. He has worked extensively in the field of biological game theory, and, in 1990, devised a model showing that Zahavi's well-known handicap principle could theoretically exist in natural populations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sir Philip Sidney game</span>

In biology and game theory, the Sir Philip Sidney game is used as a model for the evolution and maintenance of informative communication between relatives. Developed by John Maynard Smith as a model for chick begging behavior, it has been studied extensively including the development of many modified versions.

A biological ornament is a characteristic of an animal that appears to serve a decorative function rather than a utilitarian function. Many are secondary sexual characteristics, and others appear on young birds during the period when they are dependent on being fed by their parents. Ornaments are used in displays to attract mates, which may lead to the evolutionary process known as sexual selection. An animal may shake, lengthen, or spread out its ornament in order to get the attention of the opposite sex, which will in turn choose the most attractive one with which to mate. Ornaments are most often observed in males, and choosing an extravagantly ornamented male benefits females as the genes that produce the ornament will be passed on to her offspring, increasing their own reproductive fitness. As Ronald Fisher noted, the male offspring will inherit the ornament while the female offspring will inherit the preference for said ornament, which can lead to a positive feedback loop known as a Fisherian runaway. These structures serve as cues to animal sexual behaviour, that is, they are sensory signals that affect mating responses. Therefore, ornamental traits are often selected by mate choice.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sexual swelling</span> Swelling of genital and perineal skin in some mammals as a sign of fertility

Sexual swelling, sexual skin, or anogenital tumescence refers to localized engorgement of the anus and vulva region of some female primates that vary in size over the course of the menstrual cycle. Thought to be an honest signal of fertility, male primates are attracted to these swellings; preferring, and competing for, females with the largest swellings.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Parasite-stress theory</span> Theory of human evolution

Parasite-stress theory, or pathogen-stress theory, is a theory of human evolution proposing that parasites and diseases encountered by a species shape the development of species' values and qualities, proposed by researchers Corey Fincher and Randy Thornhill.

Costly signaling theory in evolutionary psychology refers to uses of costly signaling theory and adaptationism in explanations for psychological traits and states. Often informed by the closely related fields of human behavioral ecology and cultural evolution, such explanations are predominantly focused on humans and emphasize the benefits of altering the perceptions of others and the need to do so in ways that are difficult to fake due to the widespread existence of adaptations which demand reliable information to avoid manipulation through dishonest signals.

References

  1. 1 2 3 Grafen, A. (1990). "Biological signals as handicaps". Journal of Theoretical Biology. 144 (4): 517–546. Bibcode:1990JThBi.144..517G. doi:10.1016/S0022-5193(05)80088-8. PMID   2402153.
  2. 1 2 Zahavi, Amotz (1975). "Mate selection—A selection for a handicap". Journal of Theoretical Biology. 53 (1). Elsevier BV: 205–214. Bibcode:1975JThBi..53..205Z. doi:10.1016/0022-5193(75)90111-3. ISSN   0022-5193. PMID   1195756.
  3. 1 2 Zahavi, Amotz (1977). "The cost of honesty". Journal of Theoretical Biology. 67 (3). Elsevier BV: 603–605. Bibcode:1977JThBi..67..603Z. doi:10.1016/0022-5193(77)90061-3. ISSN   0022-5193. PMID   904334.
  4. 1 2 Zahavi, Amotz; Zahavi, Avishag (1997). The handicap principle: a missing piece of Darwin's puzzle (PDF). New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN   978-0-19-510035-8. OCLC   35360821.
  5. 1 2 Davis, J. W. F.; O'Donald, P. (1976). "Sexual selection for a handicap: A critical analysis of Zahavi's model". Journal of Theoretical Biology. 57 (2): 345–354. Bibcode:1976JThBi..57..345D. doi:10.1016/0022-5193(76)90006-0. PMID   957664.
  6. 1 2 Eshel, I. (1978). "On the Handicap Principle—A Critical Defence". Journal of Theoretical Biology. 70 (2): 245–250. Bibcode:1978JThBi..70..245E. doi:10.1016/0022-5193(78)90350-8. PMID   633919.
  7. 1 2 Kirkpatrick, M. (1986). "The handicap mechanism of sexual selection does not work". American Naturalist . 127 (2): 222–240. doi:10.1086/284480. JSTOR   2461351. S2CID   83984463.
  8. 1 2 Pomiankowski, A. (1987). "Sexual selection: The handicap principle does work sometimes". Proceedings of the Royal Society B . 231 (1262): 123–145. Bibcode:1987RSPSB.231..123P. doi:10.1098/rspb.1987.0038. S2CID   144837163.
  9. 1 2 Maynard Smith, John (1976). "Sexual selection and the handicap principle". Journal of Theoretical Biology. 57 (1): 239–242. Bibcode:1976JThBi..57..239S. doi:10.1016/S0022-5193(76)80016-1. PMID   957656.
  10. ↑ Zahavi, Amotz (1997). The handicap principle: a missing piece of Darwin's puzzle . New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN   978-0-19-510035-8. OCLC   35360821.
  11. ↑ Grose, Jonathan (7 June 2011). "Modelling and the fall and rise of the handicap principle". Biology & Philosophy. 26 (5): 677–696. doi:10.1007/s10539-011-9275-1. S2CID   84600072.
  12. ↑ Review by Pomiankowski, Andrew; Iwasa, Y. (1998). "Handicap Signaling: Loud and True?". Evolution . 52 (3): 928–932. doi:10.2307/2411290. JSTOR   2411290. S2CID   53060420.
  13. 1 2 3 Johnstone, R. A. (1995). "Sexual selection, honest advertisement and the handicap principle: reviewing the evidence". Biological Reviews . 70 (1): 1–65. doi:10.1111/j.1469-185X.1995.tb01439.x. PMID   7718697. S2CID   40322800.
  14. ↑ Johnstone, Rufus A. (1997). "The Evolution of Animal Signals". In Krebs, J. R.; Davies, N. B. (eds.). Behavioural Ecology: An Evolutionary Approach (4th ed.). Blackwell. pp.  155–178. ISBN   978-0865427310.
  15. ↑ Maynard Smith, John; Harper, David (2003). "The theory of costly signalling". Animal Signals. Oxford University Press. pp. 16–31. ISBN   978-0-19-852685-8.
  16. ↑ Maynard Smith, John (1978). "The Handicap Principle—A Comment". Journal of Theoretical Biology. 70 (2): 251–252. Bibcode:1978JThBi..70..251S. doi:10.1016/0022-5193(78)90351-X. PMID   633920.
  17. ↑ Maynard Smith, John (1985). "Mini Review: Sexual Selection, Handicaps and True Fitness". Journal of Theoretical Biology. 115 (1): 1–8. doi:10.1016/S0022-5193(85)80003-5. PMID   4033159.
  18. ↑ Spence, A. M. (1973). "Job Market Signaling". Quarterly Journal of Economics . 87 (3): 355–374. doi:10.2307/1882010. JSTOR   1882010.
  19. ↑ Getty, T. (1998a). "Handicap signalling: when fecundity and viability do not add up". Animal Behaviour . 56 (1): 127–130. doi:10.1006/anbe.1998.0744. PMID   9710469. S2CID   36731320.
  20. ↑ Getty, T. (1998b). "Reliable signalling need not be a handicap". Anim. Behav. 56 (1): 253–255. doi:10.1006/anbe.1998.0748. PMID   9710484. S2CID   34066689.
  21. ↑ Getty, Thomas (2002). "Signaling health versus parasites". American Naturalist . 159 (4): 363–371. doi:10.1086/338992. JSTOR   338992. PMID   18707421. S2CID   12598696.
  22. ↑ Getty, T. (2006). "Sexually selected signals are not similar to sports handicaps". Trends in Ecology & Evolution . 21 (2): 83–88. doi:10.1016/j.tree.2005.10.016. PMID   16701479.
  23. ↑ Nur, N.; Hasson, O. (1984). "Phenotypic plasticity and the handicap principle". J. Theor. Biol. 110 (2): 275–297. Bibcode:1984JThBi.110..275N. doi:10.1016/S0022-5193(84)80059-4.
  24. 1 2 Godfray, H. C. J. (1991). "Signalling of need by offspring to their parents". Nature . 352 (6333): 328–330. Bibcode:1991Natur.352..328G. doi:10.1038/352328a0. S2CID   4288527.
  25. ↑ Yachi, S. (1995). "How can honest signalling evolve? The role of the handicap principle". Proceedings of the Royal Society B . 262 (1365): 283–288. doi:10.1098/rspb.1995.0207. S2CID   85339637.
  26. ↑ Adams, E. S.; Mesterton-Gibbons, M. (1995). "The cost of threat displays and the stability of deceptive communication". Journal of Theoretical Biology. 175 (4): 405–421. Bibcode:1995JThBi.175..405A. doi: 10.1006/jtbi.1995.0151 .
  27. ↑ Kim, Y-G. (1995). "Status signalling games in animal contests". Journal of Theoretical Biology. 176 (2): 221–231. Bibcode:1995JThBi.176..221K. doi:10.1006/jtbi.1995.0193. PMID   7475112.
  28. ↑ Enquist, M. (1985). "Communication during aggressive interactions with particular reference to variation in choice of behaviour". Animal Behaviour. 33 (4): 1152–1161. doi:10.1016/S0003-3472(85)80175-5. S2CID   53200843.
  29. ↑ Rodriguez-Girones, M. A.; Cotton, P. A.; Kacelnik, A. (1996). "The evolution of begging: signaling and sibling competition". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America . 93 (25): 14637–14641. Bibcode:1996PNAS...9314637R. doi: 10.1073/pnas.93.25.14637 . PMC   26187 . PMID   8962106.
  30. ↑ Lachmann, M.; Bergstrom, C. T. (1998). "Signalling among relatives. II. Beyond the tower of babel". Theoretical Population Biology. 54 (2): 146–160. Bibcode:1998TPBio..54..146L. doi: 10.1006/tpbi.1997.1372 . PMID   9733656.
  31. ↑ Kock, N. (2011). "A mathematical analysis of the evolution of human mate choice traits: Implications for evolutionary psychologists" (PDF). Journal of Evolutionary Psychology. 9 (3): 219–247. doi:10.1556/jep.9.2011.3.1.
  32. ↑ Hurd, Peter L. (May 1995). "Communication in discrete action-response games". Journal of Theoretical Biology. 174 (2): 217–222. Bibcode:1995JThBi.174..217H. doi:10.1006/jtbi.1995.0093. ISSN   0022-5193.
  33. ↑ Számadó, Szabolcs (June 1999). "The Validity of the Handicap Principle in Discrete Action–Response Games". Journal of Theoretical Biology. 198 (4): 593–602. Bibcode:1999JThBi.198..593S. doi:10.1006/jtbi.1999.0935. ISSN   0022-5193. PMID   10373357.
  34. ↑ Lachmann, Michael; Számadó, Szabolcs; Bergstrom, Carl T. (2001-10-30). "Cost and conflict in animal signals and human language". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 98 (23): 13189–13194. Bibcode:2001PNAS...9813189L. doi: 10.1073/pnas.231216498 . ISSN   0027-8424. PMC   60846 . PMID   11687618.
  35. ↑ Számadó, Szabolcs; Czégel, Dániel; Zachar, István (2017-12-28). "One problem, too many solutions: How costly is honest signalling of need?". PLOS ONE. 14 (1): e0208443. bioRxiv   10.1101/240440 . doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0208443 . PMC   6329501 . PMID   30633748.
  36. ↑ Számadó, Szabolcs; Zachar, István; Czégel, Dániel; Penn, Dustin J. (2023-01-08). "Honesty in signalling games is maintained by trade-offs rather than costs". BMC Biology. 21 (1): 4. doi: 10.1186/s12915-022-01496-9 . ISSN   1741-7007. PMC   9827650 . PMID   36617556.
  37. ↑ Számadó, Szabolcs (2003). "Threat Displays are not Handicaps". Journal of Theoretical Biology. 221 (3). Elsevier: 327–348. Bibcode:2003JThBi.221..327S. doi:10.1006/jtbi.2003.3176. ISSN   0022-5193. PMID   12642112.
  38. ↑ Huttegger, Simon M.; Bruner, Justin P.; Zollman, Kevin J. S. (2015). "The Handicap Principle Is an Artifact". Philosophy of Science. 82 (5): 997–1009. doi:10.1086/683435. ISSN   0031-8248. JSTOR   10.1086/683435.
  39. ↑ Penn, Dustin J.; Számadó, Szabolcs (23 October 2019). "The Handicap Principle: how an erroneous hypothesis became a scientific principle". Biological Reviews. 95 (1). Wiley: 267–290. doi: 10.1111/brv.12563 . ISSN   1464-7931. PMC   7004190 . PMID   31642592.
  40. ↑ White, Richard C. (2016). Relational Red Flags: Detecting Undesirable Qualities in Initial Romantic EncountersRomantic Encounters. Louisiana State University (PhD thesis). doi:10.31390/gradschool_dissertations.1171. etd-04052016-153947.
  41. ↑ Bliege Bird, R.; Smith, E. A. (2005). "Signalling theory, strategic interaction, and symbolic capital". Current Anthropology . 46 (2): 221–248. doi:10.1086/427115. JSTOR   427115. S2CID   13946731.
  42. ↑ Zahavi, Amotz (1974). "Communal nesting by the Arabian Babbler: A case of individual selection". Ibis. 116: 84–87. doi:10.1111/j.1474-919X.1974.tb00225.x.
  43. ↑ Anava, A.; Kam, M.; Shkolnik, A.; Degen, A.A. (2001). "Does group size affect field metabolic rate of Arabian Babbler (Turdoides squamiceps) nestlings?". The Auk . 118 (2): 525–528. doi: 10.1642/0004-8038(2001)118[0525:DGSAFM]2.0.CO;2 . JSTOR   4089815. S2CID   38680548.
  44. ↑ Zahavi, Amotz (1990). "Arabian Babblers: The quest for social status in a cooperative Breeder". In Stacey, P. B.; Koenig, W. D. (eds.). Cooperative Breeding in Birds. Cambridge University Press. pp. 105–130.
  45. ↑ David, P.; T. Bjorksten; K. Fowler; A. Pomiankowski (2000). "Condition-dependent signalling of genetic variation in stalk-eyed flies". Nature . 406 (6792): 186–188. Bibcode:2000Natur.406..186D. doi:10.1038/35018079. PMID   10910358. S2CID   4425172.
  46. 1 2 Caro, Tim M. (1986). "The functions of stotting in Thomson's gazelles: Some tests of the predictions". Animal Behaviour. 34 (3): 663–684. doi:10.1016/S0003-3472(86)80052-5. S2CID   53155678.
  47. 1 2 Maynard Smith, John; Harper, David (2003). Animal Signals. Oxford University Press. pp. 61–63. ISBN   978-0-19-852685-8.
  48. ↑ FitzGibbon, C. D.; Fanshawe, J. H. (August 1988). "Stotting in Thomson's gazelles: an honest signal of condition". Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology. 23 (2): 69–74. Bibcode:1988BEcoS..23...69F. doi:10.1007/bf00299889. S2CID   2809268.
  49. ↑ Cresswell, Will (March 1994). "Song as a pursuit-deterrent signal, and its occurrence relative to other anti-predation behaviours of skylark (Alauda arvensis) on attack by merlins (Falco columbarius)". Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology. 34 (3): 217–223. Bibcode:1994BEcoS..34..217C. doi:10.1007/BF00167747. S2CID   25608814.
  50. ↑ Folstad, I.; Karter, A. K. (1992). "Parasites, bright males, and the immunocompetence handicap". American Naturalist. 139 (3): 603–622. doi:10.1086/285346. JSTOR   2462500. S2CID   85266542.
  51. ↑ Wedekind, C.; Folstad, I. (1994). "Adaptive or non-adaptive immunosuppression by sex hormones?". American Naturalist. 143 (5): 936–938. doi:10.1086/285641. JSTOR   2462885. S2CID   84327543.
  52. ↑ Folstad, I.; Skarstein, F. (1996). "Is male germ line control creating avenues for female choice?". Behavioral Ecology . 8 (1): 109–112. doi: 10.1093/beheco/8.1.109 .
  53. ↑ Roberts, M. L.; Buchanan, K. L.; Evans, M. R. (2004). "Testing the immunocompetence handicap hypothesis: a review of the evidence". Animal Behaviour. 68 (2): 227–239. doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2004.05.001. S2CID   9549459.


This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.