wmartin@brl-smoke.ARPA (Will Martin ) (02/26/86)
Inspired by an overindulgence in watching animal and nature progams on PBS, I've been trying to think of why some species would evolve (or maintain) a pattern of monogamous mating. I can think of evolutionary advantages to having new matings each season, for example based on competition between males so that the strongest fertilizes as many females as he can dominate or defend from other males. When it comes to species that are monogamous (mating for life, or, I suppose, until one of the pair dies), like some varieties of geese, eagles, beavers, etc., though, I find it hard to think of equivalently-good arguments to support this behavior having evolved and continued. Are there some "standard" explanations for this that I just don't know? Regards, Will Martin UUCP/USENET: seismo!brl-bmd!wmartin or ARPA/MILNET: wmartin@almsa-1.ARPA
mrh@cybvax0.UUCP (Mike Huybensz) (03/03/86)
In article <1334@brl-smoke.ARPA> wmartin@brl-smoke.ARPA (Will Martin ) writes: > Inspired by an overindulgence in watching animal and nature progams on PBS, > I've been trying to think of why some species would evolve (or maintain) > a pattern of monogamous mating. I can think of evolutionary advantages > to having new matings each season, for example based on competition > between males so that the strongest fertilizes as many females as he can > dominate or defend from other males. When it comes to species that are > monogamous (mating for life, or, I suppose, until one of the pair dies), > like some varieties of geese, eagles, beavers, etc., though, I find it > hard to think of equivalently-good arguments to support this behavior > having evolved and continued. Are there some "standard" explanations > for this that I just don't know? There are really two questions here: fidelity to one mate at a time, and fidelity to the same mate for life. Theoretically, both can be explained in terms of resources needed to rear offspring. If there is a prisoner's dilemma payoff scale (payoff in offspring) based on parental care, then infidelity doesn't pay. Thus mechanisms would evolve for ensuring fidelity by requiring expenditure of resources (time, materials, site) that could only be provided to one mate at a time. Lifelong fidelity is a quick heuristic from there: why bother with the risky and expensive process of attracting and establishing fidelity with a new mate when the old mate with a proven record is still available? -- Mike Huybensz ...decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!cybvax0!mrh
jlr@we53.UUCP (JAN L. RICHARDSON) (03/05/86)
>I've been trying to think of why some species would evolve (or maintain) >a pattern of monogamous mating. I can think of evolutionary advantages .... >having evolved and continued. Are there some "standard" explanations >for this that I just don't know? I have not been employed in the field for several years now so I have not kept current with all of the developments, but I do remember some very promising research being done with primates which indicated that the survival of the family group was actually one of the primal instincts. The idea was that some species can survive bettee as a family unit, with integral support. This being true in a natural, nondisturbed environment. This changes as man encroaches as does all of natures elements. Anyway, since I haven't been able to keep up, I don't know what has become of this research. It might be a partial answer to your question however. Perhaps someone else has more information. It's funny. In all my educational background in environmental biology and ecology we discussed the differences between types of paring, but no one ever offered any reasons for the differences. A definate void in my education. Jan Richardson Richardson Consulting 147 Joel Avenue Union, MO 63084 314/583-4563 temporary net address: ihnp4!we53!jlr DISCLAIMER: I am a subcontractor for AT&T, not an employee. Nothing in this shoulb be associated in any way with AT&T.
foy@aero.ARPA (Richard Foy) (03/13/86)
In article <416@we53.UUCP> jlr@we53.UUCP (JAN L. RICHARDSON) writes: >>I've been trying to think of why some species would evolve (or maintain) >>a pattern of monogamous mating. I can think of evolutionary advantages >.... >>having evolved and continued. Are there some "standard" explanations >>for this that I just don't know? > The book "The Woman that Never Evolved" by Sara Blaffer Hrdy discusses the mating behavior of primates in relation to human evolution. It may give you some clues to your question. Also "The Sex Contract" by Helen Fischer sort of relates to the subject. I found the research discussed in them and the conclusions drawn therefrom quite interesting. Richard Foy, Redondo Beach, CA The opinions I have expressed are the result of many years in the school of hard knocks. Thus they are my own.