Theoretical and empirical observations generally support Darwin's view that sexual dimorphism evolves due to sexual selection on, and deviation in, exaggerated male traits. Wallace presented a radical alternative, which is largely untested, that sexual dimorphism results from naturally selected deviation in protective female coloration. This leads to the prediction that deviation in female rather than male phenotype causes sexual dimorphism. Here I test Wallace's model of sexual dimorphism by tracing the evolutionary history of Batesian mimicry—an example of naturally selected protective coloration—on a molecular phylogeny of Papilio butterflies. I show that sexual dimorphism in Papilio is significantly correlated with both female-limited Batesian mimicry, where females are mimetic and males are non-mimetic, and with the deviation of female wing colour patterns from the ancestral patterns conserved in males. Thus, Wallace's model largely explains sexual dimorphism in Papilio. This finding, along with indirect support from recent studies on birds and lizards, suggests that Wallace's model may be more widely useful in explaining sexual dimorphism. These results also highlight the contribution of naturally selected female traits in driving phenotypic divergence between species, instead of merely facilitating the divergence in male sexual traits as described by Darwin's model.
Andersson M. 1994Sexual selection. Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press. Google Scholar Belt T. 1874The naturalist in Nicaragua. London, UK:Edward Bumpus. Google Scholar Boppré M. 1984Chemically mediated interactions between butterflies. , Vane-Wright R.I& Ackery P.RIn The biology of butterfliesLondon, UK:Academic Press259–275. Google Scholar Bradbury J.W& Andersson M.BIn Sexual selection: testing the alternatives1987New York, NY:Wiley. Google Scholar Brower L.P. 1963The evolution of sex-limited mimicry in butterflies. Proc. XVI Int. Cong. Zool., Washing. DC 4, 173–179. Google Scholar Campbell BIn Sexual selection and the descent of man 1871–19711972Chicago, IL:Aldine Publishing Company. Google Scholar Corbet A.S& Pendlebury H.M. 1992The butterflies of the Malay Peninsula. Kaula Lumpur, Malaysia:Malayan Nature Society. Google Scholar Darwin C. 1874The descent of man; and selection in relation to sex. 2nd edn.New York, NY:Crowell. Google Scholar Fisher R.A. 1958The genetical theory of natural selection. New York, NY:Dover Publications. Google Scholar Ford E.B. 1964Ecological genetics. London, UK:Methuen. Google Scholar Lederhouse R.C. 1995Comparative mating behavior and sexual selection in North American swallowtail butterflies. , Scriber J.M, Tsubaki Y& Lederhouse R.CIn Swallowtail butterflies: their ecology & evolutionary biologyGainesville, FL:Scientific Publishers17–131. Google Scholar Magnus D.B.E. 1963Sex limited mimicry II—visual selection in the mate choice of butterflies. Proc. XVI Int. Cong. Zool. Washing. DC 4, 179–183. Google Scholar Penz C& DeVries P.J. 2002Phylogenetic analysis of Morpho butterflies (Nymphalidae, Morphinae): implications for classification and natural history. Am. Mus. Novitat 3374, 1–33.doi:10.1206/0003-0082(2002)374<0001:PAOMBN>2.0.CO;2. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar Pinratana A& Eliot J.N. 1992Butterflies in Thailand. 3rd edn.In Papilionidae and Danaidae vol. 1Bangkok, Thailand:Brothers of St. Gabriel in Thailand. Google Scholar Platt A.P, Harrison S.J& Williams T.F. 1984Absence of differential mate selection in the North American tiger swallowtail Papilio glaucus. , Vane-Wright R.I& Ackery P.RIn The biology of butterfliesLondon, UK:Academic Press245–250. Google Scholar Poulton E.B. 1914The Mendelian relationship of the female forms of P. dardanus. Proc. Entomol. Soc. Lond 1914, lxii–llxx. Google Scholar Remington C.L. 1973Ultraviolet reflectance in mimicry and sexual signals in the Lepidoptera. J. NY Entomol. Soc 81, 124. Google Scholar Ruxton G.D, Sherratt T.N& Speed M.P. 2004Avoiding attack: the evolutionary ecology of crypsis, warning signals and mimicry. Oxford, UK:Oxford University Press. Google Scholar Selander R.K. 1972Sexual selection and dimorphism in birds. & Campbell BIn Sexual selection and the descent of man 1871–1971Chicago, IL:Aldine Publishing Company180–230. Google Scholar Sheppard P.M. 1960Natural selection and heredity. New York, NY:Harper and Row. Google Scholar Silberglied R.E. 1984Visual communication and sexual selection among butterflies. , Vane-Wright R.I& Ackery P.RIn The biology of butterfliesLondon, UK:Academic Press207–223. Google Scholar Tyler H, Brown K.S& Wilson K. 1994Swallowtail butterflies of the Americas. Gainesville, FL:Scientific Publishers. Google Scholar Vane-Wright R.IAn alternative hypothesis on the evolution of Papilio dardanus Brown. Proc. R. Entomol. Soc 411976b1–7. Google Scholar Vane-Wright R.I. 1984The role of pseudosexual selection in the evolution of butterfly colour patterns. , Vane-Wright R.I& Ackery P.RIn The biology of butterfliesLondon, UK:Academic Press251–253. Google Scholar Wallace A.R. 1889Darwinism: an exposition of the theory of natural selection with some of its applications. 2nd edn.London, UK:MacMillan. Google Scholar Wickler W. 1968Mimicry in plants and animals. London, UK:World University Library. Google Scholar