DOI: 10.5061/dryad.vq83bk473
title: Intraspecific variation in animal mating signals: a test of Mayr's conjecture

description: Mayr proposed that the stringency of stabilizing selection on animal
 mating signals is context-dependent: in species lacking sympatric
 congeners, relaxed selection pressure would afford greater intraspecific
 variability. This idea has rarely (if ever) been directly tested. Here, I
 evaluate Mayr’s conjecture using a comprehensive dataset on acoustic
 mating signals from 39 taxa (33 named species and 6 unnamed lineages) of
 North American Gryllus field crickets. In doing so, I distinguish between
 two distinct functions of mating signal components: recognition versus
 persuasion. Contrary to Mayr’s prediction, intraspecific variation in
 recognition mating signals did not increase in species with fewer or no
 sympatric congeners. Stabilizing selection on recognition traits appears
 to be maintained across both isolated and sympatric populations, possibly
 due to selection for efficient intraspecific communication—aligning with
 some aspects of Paterson’s “Specific Mate Recognition System” model.
 Persuasion traits, on the other hand, show elevated levels of variation
 consistent with directional sexual selection promoting condition
 dependence. Together these results reveal the ubiquity of stabilizing
 selection on recognition traits when at evolutionary equilibrium, and the
 critical importance of distinguishing between recognition and persuasion
 functions of animal mating signals.
description: # Intraspecific variation in animal mating signals: a test of Mayr's
 conjecture Dataset DOI:
 [10.5061/dryad.vq83bk473](https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.vq83bk473) ##
 Description of the data and file structure GENERAL INFORMATION 1\. Paper
 Citation Gray, D. A. Intraspecific variation in animal mating signals: a
 test of Mayr’s conjecture. Behavioral Ecology 2\. Brief abstract Mayr
 proposed that the stringency of stabilizing selection on animal mating
 signals is context-dependent: in species lacking sympatric congeners,
 relaxed selection pressure would afford greater intraspecific variability.
 This idea has rarely (if ever) been directly tested. Here, I evaluate
 Mayr’s conjecture using a comprehensive dataset on acoustic mating signals
 from 39 taxa (33 named species and 6 unnamed lineages) of North American
 Gryllus field crickets. In doing so, I distinguish between two distinct
 functions of mating signal components: recognition versus persuasion.
 Contrary to Mayr’s prediction, intraspecific variation in recognition
 mating signals did not increase in species with fewer or no sympatric
 congeners. Stabilizing selection on recognition traits appears to be
 maintained across both isolated and sympatric populations, possibly due to
 selection for efficient intraspecific communication—aligning with some
 aspects of Paterson’s “Specific Mate Recognition System” model. Persuasion
 traits, on the other hand, show elevated levels of variation consistent
 with directional sexual selection promoting condition dependence. Together
 these results reveal the ubiquity of stabilizing selection on recognition
 traits when at evolutionary equilibrium, and the critical importance of
 distinguishing between recognition and persuasion functions of animal
 mating signals. ### Files and variables #### File:
 Mayr_Conjecture_Main_Data.csv **Description:** Please note that this file
 is pulled in to the R script with a different name. ##### Variables *
 Taxon: = species * SNP: = count of sympatric or parapatric species * S: =
 count of sympatric species * FREQ: = coefficient of variation in Frequency
 [calculated from raw data in 'Raw_Song_Data.csv' file] *
 PRATE: = coefficient of variation in Pulse Rate [calculated from raw data
 in 'Raw_Song_Data.csv' file] * PDC: = coefficient of variation
 in Pulse Rate [calculated from raw data in 'Raw_Song_Data.csv'
 file] * PPC: = coefficient of variation in Pulse Rate [calculated from raw
 data in 'Raw_Song_Data.csv' file] * CRATE: = coefficient of
 variation in Pulse Rate [calculated from raw data in
 'Raw_Song_Data.csv' file] * CDC: = coefficient of variation in
 Pulse Rate [calculated from raw data in 'Raw_Song_Data.csv'
 file] #### File: Raw_Song_Data.csv ##### Variables * Row: = row *
 Species: = species * Recording: = ID for song archive * Temp: = recording
 temperature, degrees C * Sample: = individual measurements per song
 feature 1-5 for same individual * PDUR: = Pulse Duration, ms * IPI: =
 Interpulse Interval, ms * PPC: = Pulses per chirp, count * FREQ: =
 dominant frequency, Hz * ICI:= Interchirp interval, ms * CPT: = Chirps per
 trill [for stutter-trill species only], count * ITI: = Intertrill interval
 [for stutter-trill species only], ms * PPINT: = Pulses per introductory
 trill [for species with intro trill only], count * PRATE: = pulse rate,
 p/s * CRATE: = Chirp rate, c/s * PDC: = Pulse Duty Cycle, proportion =
 PDUR/(PDUR+IPI) * CDC: = Chirp Duty Cycle, proportion = CDUR/(CDUR+ICI).
 CDUR calculated as (PPC*PDUR)+((PPC-1)*IPI) #### File: Code.R
 **Description:** text file of R code ## Code/software SOFTWARE VERSIONS R
 4.3.1 loaded packages: MCMCglmm 2.36 Ape 5.7-1 Phytools 2.3-0 Dplyr 1.0.10
 Tidyr 1.3.1 Tibble 3.1.8 Ggplot2 3.5.1 #### File: GryllusbestUS.nex
 **Description:** phylogeny input file for R code; standard nexus format ##
 Access information Other publicly accessible locations of the data: * N/A
 Data was derived from the following sources: * Analysis of recordings of
 cricket from North America