arrow
Return

Designing mate choice experiments

delete2020-02-05
delete51
PRE
AI
L
Liam R. Dougherty *
DOI:10.1111/brv.12586delete
deleteOriginal
deleteOriginal request for help
deleteShare
deleteSave
Abstract

Abstract

En 中文
The important role that mate choice plays in the lives of animals is matched by the large and active research field dedicated to studying it. Researchers work on a wide range of species and behaviours, and so the experimental approaches used to measure animal mate choice are highly variable. Importantly, these differences are often not purely cosmetic; they can strongly influence the measurement of choice, for example by varying the behaviour of animals during tests, the aspects of choice actually measured, and statistical power. Consideration of these effects are important when comparing results among studies using different types of test, or when using laboratory results to predict animal behaviour in natural populations. However, these effects have been underappreciated by the mate choice literature to date. I focus on five key experimental considerations that may influence choice: (i) should mating be allowed to occur, or should a proxy behavioural measure of preference be used instead? (ii) Should subjects be given a choice of options? (iii) Should each subject be tested more than once, either with the same or different stimuli? (iv) When given a choice, how many options should the subject choose between? (v) What form should the experimental stimuli take? I discuss the practical advantages and disadvantages of common experimental approaches, and how they may influence the measurement of mate choice in systematic ways. Different approaches often influence the ability of animals to perceive and compare stimuli presented during tests, or the perceived costs and benefits of being choosy. Given that variation in the design of mate choice experiments is likely unavoidable, I emphasise that there is no single 'correct' approach to measuring choice across species, although ecological relevance is crucial if the aim is to understand how choice acts in natural populations. I also highlight the need for quantitative estimates of the sizes of potentially important effects, without which we cannot make informed design decisions.
Keywords:
mate choice
mating preference
experimental design
context-dependent
preference function
mate sampling
choice test
repeatability
comparative evaluation
cognition
AI Summary

AI Summary

Key information extracted from the uploaded paper, including a brief overview, abstract, background, key highlights, visual analysis, and future outlook.

Journal

Biological Reviews cover
Biological Reviews
IF:
11.7
Papers:
1.8K
Citations:
2.2W

Organization

U
University of Liverpool
Scholars:
2.8W
Papers: 2.5W
Citations: 3.5W
Cited Papers

Cited Papers

Stereoselective synthesis of (±)-conhydrine, (±)-ephedrine, and (±)-N-methylephedrine
err1983-01-01
err0
PREAI
errTatsuya Shono; auYoshihiro Matsumura; Takenobu Kanazawa
errShare
errSave
Self-regulating pseudo-monolayer printing of percolating networks of ZnO nanostructures for macroelectronics
err2011-01-01
err0
PREAI
errJi-Hyuk Choi; Jyoti P. Kar; Sachindra N. Das; Tae Il Lee; Dahl-Young Khang; Jae-Min Myoung
errShare
errSave
Larynx Injected With Polytef Paste
err1976-07-01
err0
PREAI
errC. B Stephens; G. E Arnold; J. W Stone
errShare
errSave
Immense random colocalization, revealed by automated high content image cytometry, seriously questions FISH as gold standard for detecting EML4‐ALK fusion
err2018-05-19
err0
errOAAI
errGábor Smuk; Tamás Tornóczky; László Pajor; Ilse Chudoba; Béla Kajtár; Veronika Sárosi; Gábor Pajor
errShare
errSave
Modeling and analysis of an ammonia–water absorption refrigeration system utilizing waste heat with large temperature span
err2019-07-01
err0
PREAI
errDing Lu; Qingyu Xu; Gaofei Chen; Xueqiang Dong; Yin Bai; Maoqiong Gong; Yanxing Zhao; Jun Shen
errShare
errSave
Concordance between Core Needle Biopsy and Surgical Excision Specimens for Tumour Hormone Receptor Profiling According to the 2011 St. Gallen Classification, in Clinical Practice
err2013-10-24
err0
errOAAI
errPierre Loubeyre; Alexandre Bodmer; Jean-Christophe Tille; Jean-François Egger; Sophie Diebold-Berger; Michele Copercini; Alexandre Rozenholc; Patrick Petignat; Monica Castiglione
errShare
errSave
researcher View more