Sexual size dimorphism and sexual selection in primates

In most animals, females are larger than males. Paradoxically, sexual size dimorphism is biased towards males in most mammalian species. An accepted explanation is that sexual dimorphism in mammals evolved by intramale sexual selection. I tested this hypothesis in primates, by relating sexual size dimorphism to seven proxies of sexual selection intensity: operational sex ratio, mating system, intermale competition, group sex ratio, group size, maximum mating percentage (percentage of observed copulations involving the most successful male), and total paternity (a genetic estimate of the percentage of young sired by the most successful male). I fitted phylogenetic generalised least squares models using sexual size dimorphism as the dependent variable and each of the seven measures of intensity of sexual selection as independent variables. I conducted this comparative analysis with data from 50 extant species of primates, including Homo sapiens, Pan troglodytes, and Gorilla spp. Sexual dimorphism was positively related to the four measures of female monopolisation (operational sex ratio, mating system, intermale competition, and group sex ratio) and in some cases to group size, but was not associated with maximum mating percentage or total paternity. Additional regression analyses indicated that maximum mating percentage and total paternity were negatively associated with group size. These results are predicted by reproductive skew theory: in large groups, males can lose control of the sexual behaviour of the other members of the group or can concede reproductive opportunities to others. The results are also consistent with the evolution of sexual size dimorphism before polygyny, due to the effects of natural, rather than sexual, selection. In birds, the study of molecular paternity showed that variance in male reproductive success is much higher than expected by behaviour. In mammals, recent studies have begun to show the opposite trend, i.e. that intensity of sexual selection is lower than expected by polygyny. Results of this comparative analysis of sexual size dimorphism and sexual selection intensity in primates suggest that the use of intramale sexual selection theory to explain the evolution of polygyny and sexual dimorphism in mammals should be reviewed, and that natural selection should be considered alongside sexual selection as an evolutionary driver of sexual size dimorphism and polygyny in mammals.