It is often claimed that pair bonds preferentially form between individuals that resemble one another. Such assortative mating appears to be widespread throughout the animal kingdom. Yet it is unclear whether the apparent ubiquity of assortative mating arises primarily from mate choice ("like attracts like"), which can be constrained by same-sex competition for mates; from spatial or temporal separation; or from observer, reporting, publication, or search bias. Here, based on a conventional literature search, we find compelling meta-analytical evidence for size-assortative mating in birds (r = 0.178, 95% CI 0.142-0.215, 83 species, 35,591 pairs). However, our analyses reveal that this effect vanishes gradually with increased control of confounding factors. Specifically, the effect size decreased by 42% when we used previously unpublished data from nine long-term field studies, i.e., data free of reporting and publication bias (r = 0.103, 95% CI 0.074-0.132, eight species, 16,611 pairs). Moreover, in those data, assortative mating effectively disappeared when both partners were measured by independent observers or separately in space and time (mean r = 0.018, 95% CI -0.016-0.057). Likewise, we also found no evidence for assortative mating in a direct experimental test for mutual mate choice in captive populations of Zebra finches (r = -0.020, 95% CI -0.148-0.107, 1,414 pairs). These results highlight the importance of unpublished data in generating unbiased meta-analytical conclusions and suggest that the apparent ubiquity of assortative mating reported in the literature is overestimated and may not be driven by mate choice or mating competition for preferred mates.

Behavioural Ecology Department of Biology Ludwig Maximilians University of Munich Planegg Martinsried Germany

Bioeconomy Research Team Novia University of Applied Sciences Raseborgsvägen Ekenäs Finland

Center for the Study of Biodiversity and Conservation Autonomous University of the State of Morelos Cuernavaca Morelos Mexico

Conservation Ecology Group Groningen Institute for Evolutionary Life Sciences University of Groningen Groningen the Netherlands

Department of Behavioural Ecology and Evolutionary Genetics Max Planck Institute for Ornithology Seewiesen Germany

Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology University of Arizona Tucson Arizona United States of America

Department of Ecology Faculty of Environmental Sciences Czech University of Life Sciences Prague Kamýcká Prague Czech Republic

Institute of Ecology Department of Evolutionary Ecology Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México Mexico City Distrito Federal Mexico

Institute of Vertebrate Biology of the Czech Academy of Sciences Brno and Faculty of Science Charles University Prague Czech Republic

NIOZ Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research Department of Coastal Systems and Utrecht University Den Burg the Netherlands

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Alford JR, Hatemi PK, Hibbing JR, Martin NG, Eaves LJ. The Politics of Mate Choice. J Polit. 2011;73(2):362–79. 10.1017/S0022381611000016 PubMed PMID: WOS:000291011400005. DOI

Klofstad CA, McDermott R, Hatemi PK. The Dating Preferences of Liberals and Conservatives. Polit Behav. 2013;35(3):519–38. 10.1007/s11109-012-9207-z PubMed PMID: WOS:000322879300004. DOI

Domingue BW, Fletcher J, Conley D, Boardman JD. Genetic and educational assortative mating among US adults. P Natl Acad Sci USA. 2014;111(22):7996–8000. 10.1073/pnas.1321426111 PubMed PMID: WOS:000336687900041. PubMed DOI PMC

Robinson MR, Kleinman A, Graff M, Vinkhuyzen AAE, Couper D, Miller MB, et al. Genetic evidence of assortative mating in humans. Nat Hum Behav. 2017;1(1). doi: UNSP 001610.1038/s41562-016-0016. PubMed PMID: WOS:000418775900029.

Tenesa A, Rawlik K, Navarro P, Canela-Xandri O. Genetic determination of height-mediated mate choice. Genome Biol. 2016;16. doi: ARTN 26910.1186/s13059-015-0833-8. PubMed PMID: WOS:000368401300001. 10.1186/s13059-015-0833-8 PubMed DOI PMC

Stulp G, Simons MJP, Grasman S, Pollet TV. Assortative mating for human height: A meta-analysis. Am J Hum Biol. 2017;29(1). doi: ARTN e2291710.1002/ajhb.22917. PubMed PMID: WOS:000393614900020. PubMed PMC

Jiang YX, Bolnick DI, Kirkpatrick M. Assortative Mating in Animals. Am Nat. 2013;181(6):E125–E38. 10.1086/670160 PubMed PMID: WOS:000318996500001. PubMed DOI

Rolan-Alvarez E, Carvajal-Rodriguez A, de Coo A, Cortes B, Estevez D, Ferreira M, et al. The scale-of-choice effect and how estimates of assortative mating in the wild can be biased due to heterogeneous samples. Evolution. 2015;69(7):1845–57. 10.1111/evo.12691 PubMed PMID: WOS:000358503800016. PubMed DOI

Village A. Spring arrival times and assortative mating of kestrels in south Scotland. J Anim Ecol. 1985:857–68.

Anderson C, Keltner D, John OP. Emotional convergence between people over time. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2003;84(5):1054–68. 10.1037/0022-3514.84.5.1054 PubMed PMID: WOS:000182769800011. PubMed DOI

Feunekes GIJ, Stafleu A, de Graaf C, van Staveren WA. Family resemblance in fat intake in the Netherlands. Eur J Clin Nutr. 1997;51(12):793–9. 10.1038/sj.ejcn.1600494 PubMed PMID: WOS:000071256800001. PubMed DOI

Price RA, Vandenberg SG. Spouse similarity in American and Swedish couples. Behav Genet. 1980;10(1):59–71. PubMed

Crespi BJ. Causes of Assortative Mating in Arthropods. Animal Behaviour. 1989;38:980–1000. 10.1016/S0003-3472(89)80138-1 PubMed PMID: WOS:A1989CG12900007. DOI

Adams J, Greenwood PJ. Why are males bigger than females in pre-copula pairs of Gammarus pulex? Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 1983;13(4):239–41.

Green DM. Rarity of Size-Assortative Mating in Animals: Assessing the Evidence with Anuran Amphibians. The American Naturalist. 2019;193(2):279–295. 10.1086/701124 PubMed DOI

Montiglio PO, Wey TW, Chang AT, Fogarty S, Sih A. Multiple mating reveals complex patterns of assortative mating by personality and body size. J Anim Ecol. 2016;85(1):125–35. 10.1111/1365-2656.12436 PubMed PMID: WOS:000368141400013. PubMed DOI

Cunningham R, Lindenmayer D, Nix H, Lindenmayer B. Quantifying observer heterogeneity in bird counts. Austral Ecology. 1999;24(3):270–7.

Open-Science-Collaboration. Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science. 2015;349(6251):aac4716. PubMed

Greenwald AG. Consequences of Prejudice against Null Hypothesis. Psychol Bull. 1975;82(1):1–19. 10.1037/h0076157 PubMed PMID: WOS:A1975V506300001. DOI

Kulshrestha J, Eslami M, Messias J, Zafar MB, Ghosh S, Gummadi KP, et al., editors. Quantifying search bias: Investigating sources of bias for political searches in social media. Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing; 2017: ACM.

Ferguson CJ, Heene M. A vast graveyard of undead theories: Publication bias and psychological science’s aversion to the null. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2012;7(6):555–61. 10.1177/1745691612459059 PubMed DOI

Houtman AM, Falls JB. Negative assortative mating in the white-throated sparrow, Zonotrichia albicollis: the role of mate choice and intra-sexual competition. Animal Behaviour. 1994;48(2):377–83.

Garcia-Navas V, Ortego J, Sanz JJ. Heterozygosity-based assortative mating in blue tits (Cyanistes caeruleus): implications for the evolution of mate choice. P R Soc B. 2009;276(1669):2931–40. 10.1098/rspb.2009.0417 PubMed PMID: WOS:000267881500009. PubMed DOI PMC

Ihle M, Kempenaers B, Forstmeier W. Fitness Benefits of Mate Choice for Compatibility in a Socially Monogamous Species. PLoS Biol. 2015;13(9). doi: ARTNe100224810.1371/journal.pbio.1002248. PubMed PMID: WOS:000362266100012. PubMed PMC

Wang DP, Forstmeier W, Kempenaers B. No mutual mate choice for quality in zebra finches: Time to question a widely held assumption. Evolution. 2017;71(11):2661–76. 10.1111/evo.13341 PubMed PMID: WOS:000414757500009. PubMed DOI

Tang JL, Liu JLY. Misleading funnel plot for detection of bias in meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2000;53(5):477–84. 10.1016/S0895-4356(99)00204-8 PubMed PMID: WOS:000087075500005. PubMed DOI

Fanelli D. Do Pressures to Publish Increase Scientists' Bias? An Empirical Support from US States Data. PLoS ONE. 2010;5(4). doi: ARTN e1027110.1371/journal.pone.0010271. PubMed PMID: WOS:000276952500026. PubMed PMC

Parker TH, Forstmeier W, Koricheva J, Fidler F, Hadfield JD, Chee YE, et al. Transparency in Ecology and Evolution: Real Problems, Real Solutions. Trends Ecol Evol. 2016;31(9):711–9. 10.1016/j.tree.2016.07.002 PubMed PMID: WOS:000382346200010. PubMed DOI

Kittelman A, Gion C, Horner RH, Levin JR, Kratochwill TR. Establishing Journalistic Standards for the Publication of Negative Results. Rem Spec Educ. 2018;39(3):171–6. 10.1177/0741932517745491 PubMed PMID: WOS:000432624600004. DOI

Coltman D, Slate J. Microsatellite measures of inbreeding: a meta-analysis. Evolution. 2003;57(5):971–83. PubMed

Wang DP, Forstmeier W, Ihle M, Khadraoui M, Jeronimo S, Martin K, et al. Irreproducible text-book "knowledge": The effects of color bands on zebra finch fitness. Evolution. 2018;72(4):961–76. 10.1111/evo.13459 PubMed PMID: WOS:000430172900018. PubMed DOI

Sanchez-Tojar A, Nakagawa S, Sanchez-Fortun M, Martin DA, Ramani S, Girndt A, et al. Meta-analysis challenges a textbook example of status signalling and demonstrates publication bias. Elife. 2018;7. doi: ARTN e37385. PubMed PMC

Culina A, Baglioni M, Crowther TW, Visser ME, Woutersen-Windhouwer S, Manghi P. Navigating the unfolding open data landscape in ecology and evolution. Nature ecology & evolution. 2018;2(3):420. PubMed

Class B, Dingemanse NJ, Araya-Ajoy YG, Brommer JE. A statistical methodology for estimating assortative mating for phenotypic traits that are labile or measured with error. Methods Ecol Evol. 2017;8(12):1910–9. 10.1111/2041-210x.12837 PubMed PMID: WOS:000417239200027. DOI

Nickerson RS. Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of general psychology. 1998;2(2):175.

Holman L, Head ML, Lanfear R, Jennions MD. Evidence of experimental bias in the life sciences: why we need blind data recording. PLoS Biol. 2015;13(7):e1002190 10.1371/journal.pbio.1002190 PubMed DOI PMC

Fargevieille A, Grégoire A, Charmantier A, Rey Granado M, Doutrelant C. Assortative mating by colored ornaments in blue tits: space and time matter. Ecology and Evolution. 2017;7(7):2069–78. 10.1002/ece3.2822 PubMed DOI PMC

Class B, Brommer JE. Shared environmental effects bias phenotypic estimates of assortative mating in a wild bird. Biol Letters. 2018;14(7). doi: ARTN 2018010610.1098/rsbl.2018.0106. PubMed PMID: WOS:000440138500003. PubMed PMC

Buss DM. Human Mate Selection. Am Sci. 1985;73(1):47–51. PubMed PMID: WOS:A1985AAQ7200017.

Fargevieille A, Gregoire A, Charmantier A, Granado MD, Doutrelant C. Assortative mating by colored ornaments in blue tits: space and time matter. Ecol Evol. 2017;7(7):2069–78. 10.1002/ece3.2822 PubMed PMID: WOS:000399738700006. PubMed DOI PMC

Coltman DW, Slate J. Microsatellite measures of inbreeding: A meta-analysis. Evolution. 2003;57(5):971–83. PubMed PMID: ISI:000183500900004. PubMed

Nakagawa S, Cuthill IC. Effect size, confidence interval and statistical significance: a practical guide for biologists. Biol Rev. 2007;82(4):591–605. 10.1111/j.1469-185X.2007.00027.x PubMed PMID: WOS:000250251600004. PubMed DOI

Bates D, Maechler M, Bolker B, Walker S. lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4. R package version. 2014;1(7):1–23.

Team RC. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria: 2016. 2017.

Petrželková A, Michálková R, Albrechtová J, Cepák J, Honza M, Kreisinger J, et al. Brood parasitism and quasi-parasitism in the European barn swallow Hirundo rustica rustica. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 2015;69(9):1405–14. 10.1007/s00265-015-1953-6 PubMed PMID: WOS:000359639500001. DOI

Wilkins MR, Karaardıç H, Vortman Y, Parchman TL, Albrecht T, Petrželková A, et al. Phenotypic differentiation is associated with divergent sexual selection among closely related barn swallow populations. J Evolution Biol. 2016;29(12):2410–21. 10.1111/jeb.12965 PubMed PMID: WOS:000389844700006. PubMed DOI

Drummond H, Torres R, Krishnan VV. Buffered development: Resilience after aggressive subordination in infancy. Am Nat. 2003;161(5):794–807. 10.1086/375170 PubMed PMID: WOS:000183276900008. PubMed DOI

Kiere LM, Ramos AG, Drummond H. No evidence that genetic compatibility drives extra-pair behavior in female blue-footed boobies. J Avian Biol. 2016;47(6):871–9. 10.1111/jav.01061 PubMed PMID: WOS:000390326900015. DOI

Delhey K, Johnsen A, Peters A, Andersson S, Kempenaers B. Paternity analysis reveals opposing selection pressures on crown coloration in the blue tit (Parus caeruleus). P R Soc B. 2003;270(1528):2057–63. 10.1098/rspb.2003.2460 PubMed PMID: WOS:000185739600011. PubMed DOI PMC

Foerster K, Delhey K, Johnsen A, Lifjeld JT, Kempenaers B. Females increase offspring heterozygosity and fitness through extra-pair matings. Nature. 2003;425(6959):714–7. 10.1038/nature01969 PubMed PMID: WOS:000185924500041. PubMed DOI

Schlicht L, Girg A, Loes P, Valcu M, Kempenaers B. Male extrapair nestlings fledge first. Animal Behaviour. 2012;83(6):1335–43. 10.1016/j.anbehav.2012.02.021 PubMed PMID: WOS:000305082200006. DOI

Araya-Ajoy YG, Kuhn S, Mathot KJ, Mouchet A, Mutzel A, Nicolaus M, et al. Sources of (co)variation in alternative siring routes available to male great tits (Parus major). Evolution. 2016;70(10):2308–21. 10.1111/evo.13024 PubMed PMID: WOS:000385550700010. PubMed DOI

Both C, Burger C, Ouwehand J, Samplonius JM, Ubels R, Bijlsma RG. Delayed age at first breeding and experimental removals show large non-breeding surplus in Pied Flycatchers. Ardea. 2017;105(1):43–60. 10.5253/arde.v105i1.a2 PubMed PMID: WOS:000407666200006. DOI

Bulla M, Valcu M, Rutten AL, Kempenaers B. Biparental incubation patterns in a high-Arctic breeding shorebird: how do pairs divide their duties? Behav Ecol. 2014;25(1):152–64. 10.1093/beheco/art098 PubMed PMID: WOS:000328380000021. PubMed DOI PMC

Bulla M, Pruter H, Vitnerová H, Tijsen W, Sládeček M, Alves JA, et al. Flexible parental care: Uniparental incubation in biparentally incubating shorebirds. Sci Rep-Uk. 2017;7. doi: ARTN 1285110.1038/s41598-017-13005-y. PubMed PMID: WOS:000413051100001. PubMed PMC

Karell P, Ahola K, Karstinen T, Zolei A, Brommer JE. Population dynamics in a cyclic environment: consequences of cyclic food abundance on tawny owl reproduction and survival. J Anim Ecol. 2009;78(5):1050–62. 10.1111/j.1365-2656.2009.01563.x PubMed PMID: WOS:000268531700019. PubMed DOI

Aguillon SM, Duckworth RA. Kin aggression and resource availability influence phenotype-dependent dispersal in a passerine bird. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 2015;69(4):625–33. 10.1007/s00265-015-1873-5 PubMed PMID: WOS:000351235100012. DOI

Duckworth RA, Semenov GA. Hybridization Associated with Cycles of Ecological Succession in a Passerine Bird. Am Nat. 2017;190(4):E94–E105. 10.1086/693160 PubMed PMID: WOS:000411478000002. PubMed DOI

Ng TP, Williams GA, Davies MS, Stafford R, Rolán-Alvarez E. Sampling scale can cause bias in positive assortative mating estimates: evidence from two intertidal snails. Biological journal of the Linnean Society. 2016;119(2):414–9.

Schwarzer G. meta: An R package for meta-analysis. R news. 2007;7(3):40–5.

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Dryad
10.5061/dryad.7jd76kq