The crest of the peafowl: a sexually dimorphic plumage ornament signals condition in both males and females

Individual recognition (IR) behavior has been widely studied, uncovering spectacular recognition abilities across a range of taxa and modalities. Most studies of IR focus on the recognizer (receiver). These studies typically explore whether a species is capable of IR, the cues that are used for recognition and the specializations that receivers use to facilitate recognition. However, relatively little research has explored the other half of the communication equation: the individual being recognized (signaler). Provided there is a benefit to being accurately identified, signalers are expected to actively broadcast their identity with distinctive cues. Considering the prevalence of IR, there are probably widespread benefits associated with distinctiveness. As a result, selection for traits that reveal individual identity might represent an important and underappreciated selective force contributing to the evolution and maintenance of genetic polymorphisms.

Sexual selection is now widely accepted as the main evolutionary explanation of extravagant male ornaments. By contrast, ornaments occurring in females have received little attention and often have been considered as nonadaptive, correlated effects of selection on males. However, recent comparative evidence suggests that female ornaments have evolved quite independently of male showiness. Also, new theoretical models predict that both male mate choice and female contest competition will occur under certain circumstances. This is supported by recent experimental studies. Thus, selection acting on females might be a widespread cause of female ornaments.

The handicap hypothesis of sexual selection predicts that sexual ornaments have evolved heightened condition-dependent expression. The prediction has only recently been subject to experimental investigation. Many of the experiments are of limited value as they: (i) fail to compare condition dependence in sexual ornaments with suitable non-sexual trait controls; (ii) do not adequately account for body size variation; and (iii) typically consider no stress and extreme stress manipulations rather than a range of stresses similar to those experienced in nature. There is also a dearth of experimental studies investigating the genetic basis of condition dependence. Despite the common claim that sexual ornaments are condition-dependent, the unexpected conclusion from our literature review is that there is little support from well-designed experiments.