4.5 Article

Evolution of increased competitiveness in cows trades off with reduced milk yield, fertility and more masculine morphology

Journal

EVOLUTION
Volume 69, Issue 8, Pages 2235-2245

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/evo.12723

Keywords

Female contest; genetic correlations; fitness; life-history evolution; secondary sexual traits; quantitative genetics

Funding

  1. ANABoRaVa
  2. Region of Aosta Valley

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In some species females compete for food, foraging territories, mating, and nesting sites. Competing females can exhibit morphological, physiological, and behavioral adaptations typical of males, which are commonly considered as secondary sexual traits. Competition and the development of traits increasing competitiveness require much energy and may exert adverse effects on fecundity and survival. From an evolutionary perspective, positive selection for increased competitiveness would then result in evolution of reduced values for traits related to fitness such as fecundity and survival. There is recent evidence for such evolutionary trade-offs involving male competition, but no study has considered competing females so far. Using data from competitions for dominance in cows (Bos taurus), we found negative genetic correlations between traits providing success in competition, that is, fighting ability and fitness traits related to milk production and with fertility (the inverse of parity-conception interval). Fighting ability also showed low but positive genetic correlations with masculine morphological traits, and negative correlations with feminine traits. A genetic change in traits over time has occurred due to selection on competitiveness, corresponding to an evolutionary process of masculinization counteracting the official selection for milk yield. Similar evolutionary trade-off between success in competition and fitness components may be present in various species experiencing female competition.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available