IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0006012.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sex Is Always Well Worth Its Two-Fold Cost

Author

Listed:
  • Alexander Feigel
  • Avraham Englander
  • Assaf Engel

Abstract

Sex is considered as an evolutionary paradox, since its positive contribution to Darwinian fitness remains unverified for some species. Defenses against unpredictable threats (parasites, fluctuating environment and deleterious mutations) are indeed significantly improved by wider genetic variability and by positive epistasis gained by sexual reproduction. The corresponding evolutionary advantages, however, do not overcome universally the barrier of the two-fold cost for sharing half of one's offspring genome with another member of the population. Here we show that sexual reproduction emerges and is maintained even when its Darwinian fitness is twice as low as the fitness of asexuals. We also show that more than two sexes (inheritance of genetic material from three or even more parents) are always evolutionary unstable. Our approach generalizes the evolutionary game theory to analyze species whose members are able to sense the sexual state of their conspecifics and to adapt their own sex consequently, either by switching or by taxis towards the highest concentration of the complementary sex. The widespread emergence and maintenance of sex follows therefore from its co-evolution with the even more widespread environmental sensing abilities.

Suggested Citation

  • Alexander Feigel & Avraham Englander & Assaf Engel, 2009. "Sex Is Always Well Worth Its Two-Fold Cost," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(7), pages 1-6, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0006012
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0006012
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0006012
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0006012&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0006012?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. G. S. van Doorn & M. Kirkpatrick, 2007. "Turnover of sex chromosomes induced by sexual conflict," Nature, Nature, vol. 449(7164), pages 909-912, October.
    2. Erika Check Hayden, 2008. "Evolution: Scandal! Sex-starved and still surviving," Nature, Nature, vol. 452(7188), pages 678-680, April.
    3. Theodore C. Bergstrom, 2003. "The Algebra of Assortative Encounters and the Evolution of Cooperation," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 5(03), pages 211-228.
    4. Nick Colegrave, 2002. "Sex releases the speed limit on evolution," Nature, Nature, vol. 420(6916), pages 664-666, December.
    5. Joel R. Peck & David Waxman, 2000. "Mutation and sex in a competitive world," Nature, Nature, vol. 406(6794), pages 399-404, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Holmström, Kerstin & Jensen, Henrik Jeldtoft, 2004. "Who runs fastest in an adaptive landscape: sexual versus asexual reproduction," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 337(1), pages 185-195.
    2. Alger, Ingela, 2021. "On the evolution of male competitiveness," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 228-254.
    3. Ingela Alger & Jörgen W. Weibull, 2013. "Homo Moralis—Preference Evolution Under Incomplete Information and Assortative Matching," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 81(6), pages 2269-2302, November.
    4. Alger, Ingela & Weibull, Jörgen W., 2014. "Evolution leads to Kantian morality," TSE Working Papers 14-504, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE), revised Jun 2015.
    5. Dimitry Rtischev, 2011. "Evolution of vulnerability to pain in interpersonal relations as a strategic trait aiding cooperation," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 21(5), pages 757-782, December.
    6. Michael Foley & Rory Smead & Patrick Forber & Christoph Riedl, 2021. "Avoiding the bullies: The resilience of cooperation among unequals," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(4), pages 1-18, April.
    7. Newton, Jonathan, 2017. "Shared intentions: The evolution of collaboration," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 517-534.
    8. Ingela Alger & Jörgen W. Weibull, 2019. "Evolutionary Models of Preference Formation," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 11(1), pages 329-354, August.
    9. Alexandros Rigos & Heinrich H. Nax, 2015. "Assortativity evolving from social dilemmas," Discussion Papers in Economics 15/19, Division of Economics, School of Business, University of Leicester.
    10. Alger, Ingela & Weibull, Jörgen W. & Lehmann, Laurent, 2020. "Evolution of preferences in structured populations: Genes, guns, and culture," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    11. Alger, Ingela & Weibull, Jörgen W., 2016. "Morality: evolutionary foundations and policy implications," TSE Working Papers 16-702, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    12. Daniel G. Arce, 2011. "Putting Agency and Integrity to the Test," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 77(4), pages 843-855, April.
    13. Wong, Linda, 2003. "An Empirical Study of Darwin's Theory of Mate Choice," Working Papers 187, The University of Chicago Booth School of Business, George J. Stigler Center for the Study of the Economy and the State.
    14. Alger, Ingela, 2022. "Evolutionarily stable preferences," TSE Working Papers 22-1355, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE), revised Dec 2022.
    15. Wu, Jiabin, 2023. "Institutions, assortative matching and cultural evolution," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    16. Deby Cassill & Indira Kuriachan & S. Vinson, 2007. "A Test of Two Skew Models to Explain Cooperative Breeding," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 19-37, April.
    17. David K Levine & Salvatore Modica, 2013. "Conflict, Evolution, Hegemony, and the Power of the State," Levine's Working Paper Archive 786969000000000692, David K. Levine.
    18. Jonathan Newton, 2018. "Evolutionary Game Theory: A Renaissance," Games, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-67, May.
    19. Ennio Bilancini & Leonardo Boncinelli & Alessandro Tampieri, 2021. "Strategy Assortativity and the Evolution of Parochialism," DEM Discussion Paper Series 21-20, Department of Economics at the University of Luxembourg.
    20. van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M. & Gowdy, John M., 2009. "A group selection perspective on economic behavior, institutions and organizations," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 1-20, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0006012. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.