Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Advertisement

Heredity
  • View all journals
  • Search
  • Log in
  • Content Explore content
  • About the journal
  • Publish with us
  • Sign up for alerts
  • RSS feed
  1. nature
  2. heredity
  3. original article
  4. article
Diploid models of the handicap principle
Download PDF
Download PDF
  • Original Article
  • Published: 01 April 1988

Diploid models of the handicap principle

  • I P M Tomlinson1 

Heredity volume 60, pages 283–293 (1988)Cite this article

  • 1605 Accesses

  • 42 Citations

  • Metrics details

Abstract

“Fisherian” models of sexual selection by female choice assume that females prefer male characters which are initially advantageous or neutral ; character and preference then spread through the population. Once female preference has evolved to a higher frequency, the male character can become more extreme and disadvantageous by the action of some force such as the “ super-normal stimulus”. By contrast, the “handicap principle” of sexual selection proposes that females should prefer more extreme, disadvantaged males: males who survive the disadvantage of the “handicap” must be fitter in other respects. Previous models of various forms of the “handicap principle” have shown that it is very unlikely to work as an alternative to the “Fisherian process”. However, recent haploid models have shown that a “condition-dependent handicap” might evolve. Diploid models show that the “condition-dependent handicap” model does not work. Models of “handicaps”operating together with the “Fisherian process” are also presented. It is inferred that “Fisherian” models are more likely than “handicap” models to account for the evolution of male sexual ornaments, although a “handicap” mechanism may aid the operation of the “Fisherian process”.

Similar content being viewed by others

Group size and mating system predict sex differences in vocal fundamental frequency in anthropoid primates

Article Open access 10 July 2023

Enhancing the precision of male fertility diagnostics through bio inspired optimization techniques

Article Open access 27 October 2025

Proteomic analysis reveals dynamic changes in cloacal fluid composition during the reproductive season in a sexually promiscuous passerine

Article Open access 20 June 2024

Article PDF

References

  • Andersson, M. 1982. Sexual selection, natural selection and quality advertisement. Biol J Linn Soc, 17, 375–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersson, M. 1986a. Sexual selection and the importance of viability differences: a reply. J theor Biol, 120, 251–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersson, M. 1986b. Evolution of condition-dependent sex ornaments and mating preferences; sexual selection based on viability differences. Evolution, 40, 804–816.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersson, M. 1987. Genetic models of sexual selection: some aims, assumptions and tests. Bradbury, J. W. and Andersson, M. (eds). In Sexual Selection: Testing the Alternatives. Dahlem Konferenzen. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, G. 1978. The handicap principle in sexual selection. Evolution, 32, 872–885.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darwin, C. 1871. The Descent of Manand Selection in Relation to Sex. John Murray, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, J W F, and O'Donald, P. 1976. Sexual selection for a handicap: a critical analysis of Zahavi's model. J theor Biol, 57, 345–354.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Endler, J A. 1983. Natural and sexual selection on colour patterns in poeciliid fishes. Env Biol Fishes, 9, 173–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eshel, I. 1978. On the handicap principle—a critical defence. J theor Biol, 70, 245–250

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, R A. 1930. The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection. The Clarendon Press, Oxford.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, W D, and Zuk, M. 1982. Heritable true fitness and bright birds; a role for parasites? Science, 218, 384–387.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, J S. 1987. The heritability of fitness: bad news for “good genes”? Trends Ecol Evol, 2, 35–38.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kirkpatrick, M. 1982. Sexual selectionand the evolution of female choice. Evolution, 36, 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirkpatrick, M. 1986a. Sexual selection and cycling parasites: a simulation study of Hamilton's hypothesis. J theor Biol, 119, 263–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirkpatrick, M. 1986b. The handicap mechanism of sexual selection does not work. Amer Natur, 127, 222–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mackay, T F C. 1986. A quantitative genetic analysis of fitness and its components in Drosophila melanogaster. Genet Res, 47, 59–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marjerus, M E N. 1986. The genetics and evolution of female choice. Trends Ecol Evol, 1, 1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maynard Smith, J. 1956. Fertility, mating behaviour and sexual selection in Drosophila subobscura. J Genet, 54, 261–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayanard Smith, J. 1976a. The Evolution of Sex. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayanard Smith, J. 1976b. Sexual selection and the handicap principle. J theor Biol, 57, 239–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayanard Smith, J. 1978. The handicap principle—a comment. J theor Biol, 70, 251–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayanard Smith, J. 1985. Sexual selection, handicaps and true fitness. Jtheor Biol, 115, 1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O'Donald, P. 1980. Genetic Models of Sexual Selection. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • O'Donald, P. 1983. The Arctic Skua. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • O'Donald, P. Derrick, M. Majerus, M E N, and Weir, J. 1984. Population genetic theory of the assortative mating, sexual selection and natural selection of the two-spot ladybird Adalia bipunctata. Heredity, 52, 43–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Partridge, L. 1980. Mate choice increases a component of offspring fitness in fruit flies. Nature, 283, 290–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Partridge, L, and Harvey, P. 1986. Contentious issues in sexual selection. Nature, 323, 580–581.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pomiankowski, A. 1987. Sexual selection: the handicap principle does work—sometimes. Proc R Soc Lond B, 231, 123–145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Read, A F. 1987. Comparative evidence supports the Hamilton and Zuk hypothesis on parasites and sexual selection. Nature, 328, 68–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Staddon, J E R. 1975. A note on the evolutionary significance of “supernormal stimuli”. Amer Natur, 109, 541–545.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • West-Eberhard, M J. 1979. Sexual selection, social competition and evolution. Proc Am Phil Soc, 123, 222–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, G C. 1975. Sex and Evolution. Princeton University Press.

  • Zahavi, A. 1975. Mate selection—a selection for a handicap. J theor Biol, 53, 205–214.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zahavi, A. 1977. The cost of honesty (further remarks on the handicap principle). J theor Biol, 67, 603–605.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Genetics, Downing Street, Cambridge, CB2 3EH, UK

    I P M Tomlinson

Authors
  1. I P M Tomlinson
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tomlinson, I. Diploid models of the handicap principle. Heredity 60, 283–293 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1038/hdy.1988.44

Download citation

  • Received: 22 June 1987

  • Issue date: 01 April 1988

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/hdy.1988.44

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

  • The influence of female viability differences on the evolution of mate choice

    • I P M Tomlinson
    • P O'Donald

    Heredity (1996)

  • Male mating success and survival in the field with respect to size and courtship song characters inDrosophila littoralis andD. montana (Diptera: Drosophilidae)

    • Jouni Aspi
    • Anneli Hoikkala

    Journal of Insect Behavior (1995)

  • Positive genetic correlation between female preference and preferred male ornament in sticklebacks

    • Theo C. M. Bakker

    Nature (1993)

Download PDF

Advertisement

Explore content

  • Research articles
  • Reviews & Analysis
  • News & Comment
  • Podcasts
  • Current issue
  • Collections
  • Follow us on Twitter
  • Sign up for alerts
  • RSS feed

About the journal

  • Journal Information
  • Open access publishing
  • About the Editors
  • Contact
  • About the Partner
  • For Advertisers
  • Subscribe

Publish with us

  • For Authors & Referees
  • Language editing services
  • Open access funding
  • Submit manuscript

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

  • Explore articles by subject
  • Find a job
  • Guide to authors
  • Editorial policies

Heredity (Heredity)

ISSN 1365-2540 (online)

ISSN 0018-067X (print)

nature.com sitemap

About Nature Portfolio

  • About us
  • Press releases
  • Press office
  • Contact us

Discover content

  • Journals A-Z
  • Articles by subject
  • protocols.io
  • Nature Index

Publishing policies

  • Nature portfolio policies
  • Open access

Author & Researcher services

  • Reprints & permissions
  • Research data
  • Language editing
  • Scientific editing
  • Nature Masterclasses
  • Research Solutions

Libraries & institutions

  • Librarian service & tools
  • Librarian portal
  • Open research
  • Recommend to library

Advertising & partnerships

  • Advertising
  • Partnerships & Services
  • Media kits
  • Branded content

Professional development

  • Nature Awards
  • Nature Careers
  • Nature Conferences

Regional websites

  • Nature Africa
  • Nature China
  • Nature India
  • Nature Japan
  • Nature Middle East
  • Privacy Policy
  • Use of cookies
  • Legal notice
  • Accessibility statement
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Your US state privacy rights
Springer Nature

© 2026 Springer Nature Limited