Loading…
Sex ratio elasticity influences the selection of sex ratio strategy
There are three sex ratio strategies (SRS) in nature—male-biased sex ratio, female-biased sex ratio and, equal sex ratio depending on the proportion of male offspring being greater than, less than, or equal to ½. The problem was already noted in Darwin’s (1859) “Origin of Species,” and it was R. A....
Saved in:
Published in: | PeerJ preprints 2016-06 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | |
---|---|
cites | |
container_end_page | |
container_issue | |
container_start_page | |
container_title | PeerJ preprints |
container_volume | |
creator | Wang, Yaqiang Wang, Ruiwu Li, Yaotang Ma, Zhanshan |
description | There are three sex ratio strategies (SRS) in nature—male-biased sex ratio, female-biased sex ratio and, equal sex ratio depending on the proportion of male offspring being greater than, less than, or equal to ½. The problem was already noted in Darwin’s (1859) “Origin of Species,” and it was R. A. Fisher (1930) who first explained why most species in nature display a sex ratio of ½. Consequent SRS theories such as Hamilton’s (1967) local mate competition (LMC) and Clark’s (1978) local resource competition (LRC) separately explained the observed deviations from the seemingly universal 1:1 ratio. However, to the best of our knowledge, there is not yet a unified theory that accounts for the mechanisms of the three SRS. Here, we introduce the price elasticity theory in economics to define sex ratio elasticity (SRE), and present an analytical model that derives three SRSs based on the following assumption: simultaneously existing competitions for both resources and mates influence the level of SRE in both sexes differently. Consequently, it is the difference (between two sexes) in the level of their sex ratio elasticity that leads to three different SRS. Our analytical results demonstrate that the elasticity-based model not only reveals a highly plausible mechanism that explains the evolution of SRS in nature, but also offers a novel framework for unifying two major classical theories (i.e., LMC & LRC) in the field of SRS research. |
doi_str_mv | 10.7287/peerj.preprints.2166v1 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1954134256</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1954134256</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-p761-2c58dc4ce981cc487d401bf1a74d19f7dcec15363f0333fd41537e1ee81dfa803</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo1T0tLxDAYDILgsu5fkIDn1nxNmqRHKb5gYQ_ufanJF20paUxScf-9AfU0MzAPhpAbYLVqtLoLiHGqQ8QQR59T3YCUX3BBNoWoqtOCX5FdShNjDJpWNqrbkP4Vv2kc8rhQnIeURzPmMx29m1f0BhPNH0gTzmiKxdPFFfEfSLkgvp-vyaUb5oS7P9yS4-PDsX-u9oenl_5-XwUloWpMq60RBjsNxgitrGDw5mBQwkLnlDVooOWSO8Y5d1YUoRAQNVg3aMa35Pa3NsTlc8WUT9OyRl8WT9C1Argop_gPRSpQAA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1954134256</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Sex ratio elasticity influences the selection of sex ratio strategy</title><source>Publicly Available Content Database</source><creator>Wang, Yaqiang ; Wang, Ruiwu ; Li, Yaotang ; Ma, Zhanshan</creator><creatorcontrib>Wang, Yaqiang ; Wang, Ruiwu ; Li, Yaotang ; Ma, Zhanshan</creatorcontrib><description>There are three sex ratio strategies (SRS) in nature—male-biased sex ratio, female-biased sex ratio and, equal sex ratio depending on the proportion of male offspring being greater than, less than, or equal to ½. The problem was already noted in Darwin’s (1859) “Origin of Species,” and it was R. A. Fisher (1930) who first explained why most species in nature display a sex ratio of ½. Consequent SRS theories such as Hamilton’s (1967) local mate competition (LMC) and Clark’s (1978) local resource competition (LRC) separately explained the observed deviations from the seemingly universal 1:1 ratio. However, to the best of our knowledge, there is not yet a unified theory that accounts for the mechanisms of the three SRS. Here, we introduce the price elasticity theory in economics to define sex ratio elasticity (SRE), and present an analytical model that derives three SRSs based on the following assumption: simultaneously existing competitions for both resources and mates influence the level of SRE in both sexes differently. Consequently, it is the difference (between two sexes) in the level of their sex ratio elasticity that leads to three different SRS. Our analytical results demonstrate that the elasticity-based model not only reveals a highly plausible mechanism that explains the evolution of SRS in nature, but also offers a novel framework for unifying two major classical theories (i.e., LMC & LRC) in the field of SRS research.</description><identifier>EISSN: 2167-9843</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.2166v1</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>San Diego: PeerJ, Inc</publisher><subject>Competition ; Ratios ; Sex ratio ; Sexes</subject><ispartof>PeerJ preprints, 2016-06</ispartof><rights>2016 Wang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (the “License”), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction and adaptation in any medium and for any purpose provided that it is properly attributed. For attribution, the original author(s), title, publication source (PeerJ Preprints) and either DOI or URL of the article must be cited. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/1954134256?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,25753,27924,27925,37012,44590</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Wang, Yaqiang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Ruiwu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Yaotang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ma, Zhanshan</creatorcontrib><title>Sex ratio elasticity influences the selection of sex ratio strategy</title><title>PeerJ preprints</title><description>There are three sex ratio strategies (SRS) in nature—male-biased sex ratio, female-biased sex ratio and, equal sex ratio depending on the proportion of male offspring being greater than, less than, or equal to ½. The problem was already noted in Darwin’s (1859) “Origin of Species,” and it was R. A. Fisher (1930) who first explained why most species in nature display a sex ratio of ½. Consequent SRS theories such as Hamilton’s (1967) local mate competition (LMC) and Clark’s (1978) local resource competition (LRC) separately explained the observed deviations from the seemingly universal 1:1 ratio. However, to the best of our knowledge, there is not yet a unified theory that accounts for the mechanisms of the three SRS. Here, we introduce the price elasticity theory in economics to define sex ratio elasticity (SRE), and present an analytical model that derives three SRSs based on the following assumption: simultaneously existing competitions for both resources and mates influence the level of SRE in both sexes differently. Consequently, it is the difference (between two sexes) in the level of their sex ratio elasticity that leads to three different SRS. Our analytical results demonstrate that the elasticity-based model not only reveals a highly plausible mechanism that explains the evolution of SRS in nature, but also offers a novel framework for unifying two major classical theories (i.e., LMC & LRC) in the field of SRS research.</description><subject>Competition</subject><subject>Ratios</subject><subject>Sex ratio</subject><subject>Sexes</subject><issn>2167-9843</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>PIMPY</sourceid><recordid>eNo1T0tLxDAYDILgsu5fkIDn1nxNmqRHKb5gYQ_ufanJF20paUxScf-9AfU0MzAPhpAbYLVqtLoLiHGqQ8QQR59T3YCUX3BBNoWoqtOCX5FdShNjDJpWNqrbkP4Vv2kc8rhQnIeURzPmMx29m1f0BhPNH0gTzmiKxdPFFfEfSLkgvp-vyaUb5oS7P9yS4-PDsX-u9oenl_5-XwUloWpMq60RBjsNxgitrGDw5mBQwkLnlDVooOWSO8Y5d1YUoRAQNVg3aMa35Pa3NsTlc8WUT9OyRl8WT9C1Argop_gPRSpQAA</recordid><startdate>20160627</startdate><enddate>20160627</enddate><creator>Wang, Yaqiang</creator><creator>Wang, Ruiwu</creator><creator>Li, Yaotang</creator><creator>Ma, Zhanshan</creator><general>PeerJ, Inc</general><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20160627</creationdate><title>Sex ratio elasticity influences the selection of sex ratio strategy</title><author>Wang, Yaqiang ; Wang, Ruiwu ; Li, Yaotang ; Ma, Zhanshan</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-p761-2c58dc4ce981cc487d401bf1a74d19f7dcec15363f0333fd41537e1ee81dfa803</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Competition</topic><topic>Ratios</topic><topic>Sex ratio</topic><topic>Sexes</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Wang, Yaqiang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Ruiwu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Yaotang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ma, Zhanshan</creatorcontrib><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Journals</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>PeerJ preprints</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Wang, Yaqiang</au><au>Wang, Ruiwu</au><au>Li, Yaotang</au><au>Ma, Zhanshan</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Sex ratio elasticity influences the selection of sex ratio strategy</atitle><jtitle>PeerJ preprints</jtitle><date>2016-06-27</date><risdate>2016</risdate><eissn>2167-9843</eissn><abstract>There are three sex ratio strategies (SRS) in nature—male-biased sex ratio, female-biased sex ratio and, equal sex ratio depending on the proportion of male offspring being greater than, less than, or equal to ½. The problem was already noted in Darwin’s (1859) “Origin of Species,” and it was R. A. Fisher (1930) who first explained why most species in nature display a sex ratio of ½. Consequent SRS theories such as Hamilton’s (1967) local mate competition (LMC) and Clark’s (1978) local resource competition (LRC) separately explained the observed deviations from the seemingly universal 1:1 ratio. However, to the best of our knowledge, there is not yet a unified theory that accounts for the mechanisms of the three SRS. Here, we introduce the price elasticity theory in economics to define sex ratio elasticity (SRE), and present an analytical model that derives three SRSs based on the following assumption: simultaneously existing competitions for both resources and mates influence the level of SRE in both sexes differently. Consequently, it is the difference (between two sexes) in the level of their sex ratio elasticity that leads to three different SRS. Our analytical results demonstrate that the elasticity-based model not only reveals a highly plausible mechanism that explains the evolution of SRS in nature, but also offers a novel framework for unifying two major classical theories (i.e., LMC & LRC) in the field of SRS research.</abstract><cop>San Diego</cop><pub>PeerJ, Inc</pub><doi>10.7287/peerj.preprints.2166v1</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | EISSN: 2167-9843 |
ispartof | PeerJ preprints, 2016-06 |
issn | 2167-9843 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_1954134256 |
source | Publicly Available Content Database |
subjects | Competition Ratios Sex ratio Sexes |
title | Sex ratio elasticity influences the selection of sex ratio strategy |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-01T12%3A31%3A45IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Sex%20ratio%20elasticity%20influences%20the%20selection%20of%20sex%20ratio%20strategy&rft.jtitle=PeerJ%20preprints&rft.au=Wang,%20Yaqiang&rft.date=2016-06-27&rft.eissn=2167-9843&rft_id=info:doi/10.7287/peerj.preprints.2166v1&rft_dat=%3Cproquest%3E1954134256%3C/proquest%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-p761-2c58dc4ce981cc487d401bf1a74d19f7dcec15363f0333fd41537e1ee81dfa803%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1954134256&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |