Encyclopedia of Evolutionary Psychological Science

Living Edition
| Editors: Todd K. Shackelford, Viviana A. Weekes-Shackelford

Male Reproductive Variance

  • Kelly A. StiverEmail author
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16999-6_1975-1

Synonyms

Definition

Within species or breeding population variation in male reproductive success.

Introduction

Within a species, individuals vary in reproductive success. In a sexual reproducing species, where each individual has one male and one female parent, increased reproductive success for certain individuals of one sex necessitates decreased reproductive success for others of that sex. Put more directly, the more extreme the winners, the more extreme the losers. While the focus of this entry is male reproductive variance, it will by necessity to also discuss female reproductive variance as a contrast, as reproductive variance is a major factor both of and contributing to sex differences, which coevolve with both mating strategies and parental care.

Coevolution with Parental Investment/Care

Across species, males tend to show greater variance in reproductive success than females. This results from females typically having a lower potential...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Alvergne, A., Jokela, M., & Lummaa, V. (2010). Personality and reproductive success in a high-fertility human population. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(26), 11745–11750.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1001752107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Apicella, C. L. (2014). Upper-body strength predicts hunting reputation and reproductive success in Hadza hunter–gatherers. Evolution and Human Behavior, 35(6), 508–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Apicella, C. L., Feinberg, D. R., & Marlowe, F. W. (2007). Voice pitch predicts reproductive success in male hunter-gatherers. Biology Letters, 3(6), 682–684.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2007.0410.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. Bateman, A. J. (1948). Intra-sexual selection in Drosophila. Heredity, 2(3), 349–368.  https://doi.org/10.1038/hdy.1948.21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Berejikian, B. A., Van Doornik, D. M., Endicott, R. C., Hoffnagle, T. L., Tezak, E. P., Moore, M. E., & Atkins, J. (2010). Mating success of alternative male phenotypes and evidence for frequency-dependent selection in Chinook salmon, Oncorhynchus tshawytscha. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 67(12), 1933–1941.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown, G. R., Laland, K. N., & Mulder, M. B. (2009). Bateman’s principles and human sex roles. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 24(6), 297–304.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2009.02.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chamberlin, J., & Guiora, A. N. (2014). Polygamy: Not ‘Big Love’ but significant harm. Women’s rights law reporter. Camden and Newark, New Jersey: Rutgers University School of Law (2014 Forthcoming).Google Scholar
  8. Davies, N. B., Krebs, J. R., & West, S. A. (2012). An introduction to behavioural ecology. Oxford: Wiley.Google Scholar
  9. Guinness World Records. (2016). Guinness world records 2017. New York: Jim.Google Scholar
  10. Hammer, M. F., Mendez, F. L., Cox, M. P., Woerner, A. E., & Wall, J. D. (2008). Sex-biased evolutionary forces shape genomic patterns of human diversity. PLoS Genetics, 4(9), e1000202.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1000202.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Jokela, M. (2009). Physical attractiveness and reproductive success in humans: Evidence from the late 20th century United States. Evolution and Human Behavior, 30(5), 342–350.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2009.03.006.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Kaplan, H., & Hill, K. (1985). Hunting ability and reproductive success among male Ache foragers: Preliminary results. Current Anthropology, 26(1), 131–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Knott, C. D. (2009). Orangutans: Sexual coercion without sexual violence. In M. N. Muller & R. W. Wrangham (Eds.), Sexual coercion in primates: An evolutionary perspective on male aggression against females (pp. 81–111). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Lank, D. B., Smith, C. M., Hanotte, O., Burke, T., & Cooke, F. (1995). Genetic polymorphism for alternative mating behaviour in lekking male ruff Philomachus pugnax. Nature, 378(6552), 59–62.  https://doi.org/10.1038/378059a0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Leboeuf, B. J. (1972). Sexual behavior in the northern elephant seal Mirounga angustirostris. Behaviour, 41(1), 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Llaurens, V., Raymond, M., & Faurie, C. (2009). Ritual fights and male reproductive success in a human population. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 22(9), 1854–1859.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1420-9101.2009.01793.x. Epub 2009 Jul 3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Nettle, D. (2002). Height and reproductive success in a cohort of British men. Human Nature, 13(4), 473–491.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-002-1004-7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Nettle, D., & Pollet, T. V. (2008). Natural selection on male wealth in humans. The American Naturalist, 172(5), 658–666.  https://doi.org/10.1086/591690.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Oberzaucher, E., & Grammer, K. (2014). The case of Moulay Ismael-fact or fancy? PLoS One, 9(2), e85292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Pietsch, T. W. (2005). Dimorphism, parasitism, and sex revisited: Modes of reproduction among deep-sea ceratioid anglerfishes (Teleostei: Lophiiformes). Ichthyological Research, 52(3), 207–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Schooling, C. M., Jiang, C., Zhang, W., Lam, T. H., Cheng, K. K., & Leung, G. M. (2011). Size does matter: Adolescent build and male reproductive success in the Guangzhou Biobank Cohort Study. Annals of Epidemiology, 21(1), 56–60.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annepidem.2010.05.005.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Sear, R. (2006). Size-dependent reproductive success in Gambian men: Does height or weight matter more? Social Biology, 53(3–4), 172–188.Google Scholar
  23. Smith, E. A. (2004). Why do good hunters have higher reproductive success? Human Nature, 15(4), 343–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Starkweather, K. E., & Hames, R. (2012). A survey of non-classical polyandry. Human Nature, 23(2), 149–172.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-012-9144-x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Stulp, G., Pollet, T. V., Verhulst, S., & Buunk, A. P. (2012). A curvilinear effect of height on reproductive success in human males. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 66(3), 375–384.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-011-1283-2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Taborsky, M. (1994). Sneakers, satellites, and helpers: Parasitic and cooperative behavior in fish reproduction. Advances in the Study of Behavior, 23(1), 1–100.Google Scholar
  27. Trivers, R. L. (1972). Parental investment and sexual selection. In B. Campbell (Ed.), Sexual selection and the descent of man, 1871–1971 (pp. 136–179). Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Psychology DepartmentSouthern Connecticut State UniversityNew HavenUSA

Section editors and affiliations

  • Joseph A. Camilleri
    • 1
  1. 1.Westfield State UniversityWestfieldUSA