ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2013
Familiarity adds to attractiveness in matters of siskin mate choice.
Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Timing and social dynamics of divorce in wild great tits: a phenomenological approach.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
- Article
- Social opportunities and mate preference improve breeding success in Caribbean iguanas.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Characteristics of the Mating Behavior of Domesticated Geese fromAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022Article
- Familiarity breeds success: pairs that meet earlier experience increased breeding performance in a wild bird population.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2020Article
- Character displacement of a learned behaviour and its implications for ecological speciation.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2019Article
- Sexual and non-sexual social preferences in male and female white-eyed bulbuls.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- Mate-guarding behavior enhances male reproductive success via familiarization with mating partners in medaka fish.Frontiers in zoology · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is currently considerable controversy in evolutionary ecology revolving around whether social familiarity brings attraction when a female chooses a mate. The topic of familiarity is significant because by avoiding or preferring familiar individuals as mates, the potential for local adaptation may be reduced or favoured. The topic becomes even more interesting if we simultaneously analyse preferences for familiarity and sexual ornaments, because when familiarity influences female mating preferences, this could very significantly affect the strength of sexual selection on male ornamentation. Here, we have used mate-choice experiments in siskins Carduelis spinus to analyse how familiarity and patterns of ornamentation (i.e. the size of wing patches) interact to influence mating success. Our results show that females clearly prefer familiar individuals when choosing between familiar and unfamiliar males with similar-sized wing patches. Furthermore, when females were given the choice between a highly ornamented unfamiliar male and a less ornamented familiar male, half of the females still preferred the socially familiar birds as mates. Our finding suggests that male familiarity may be as important as sexual ornaments in affecting female behaviour in mate choice. Given that the potential for local adaptation may be favoured by preferring familiar individuals as mates, social familiarity as a mate-choice criterion may become a potential area of fruitful research on sympatric speciation processes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.