Evolutionary Aspects of the Selection of Reproductive Partners

Wojtyła, Andrzej; Wojtyła-Buciora, Paulina; Przybył, Marek; Giermaziak, Wojciech; Wojtyła, Ewa; Grygiel, Grzegorz; Kapka-Skrzypczak, Lucyna

doi:10.2478/bgbl-2023-0020

Abstract

Romantic relationships between two people of the opposite sex have always been inspired by the pursuit of reproductive success. The sexual pairing of such partners is the driving force behind evolutionarily diverse reproductive success. The human species is equipped with adaptive psychological and biological mechanisms consisting the desire to choose a mate with high reproductive potential, while protecting the population against inbreeding. The article discusses the evolutionary goals of human procreative behavior and the mechanisms developed during evolution that guarantee the preservation of the human species on our planet.

References

Alves-Oliveira P, Carvalho J, Ferreira J i wsp. Influence of Body Odors and Gender on Perceived Genital Arousal. Arch Sex Behav 2018; 47(3):661-668. doi: 10.1007/s10508-017-1091-5.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Andersson M. Sexual selection. NJ: Princeton University Press. 1994.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Arnocky S, Denomme B, Hodges-Simeon C i wsp. Self-perceived Mate Value is Predicted by Biological and self-reported Indices of Health in Young Adults. Adapt Human Behav Physiol 2023;9(1):54-71. doi: 10.1007/s40750-022-00209-4.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Baum MJ, Kelliher KR. Complementary roles of the main and accessory olfactory systems in mammalian mate recognition. Annu Rev Physiol 2009; 71:141-60. doi: 10.1146/annurev.physiol.010908.163137.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bendas J, Hummel T, Croy I. Olfactory function relates to sexual experience in adults. Arch. Sex Behav. 2018; 47:1333–1339. doi: 10.1007/s10508-018-1203-x.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Binford LR. Constructing Frames of Reference: An Analytical Method for Archaeological Theory Building Using Ethnographic and Environmental Data Sets. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 2001.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bobst C, Lobmaier JS. Men’s preference for the ovulating female is triggered by subtle face shape differences. Hormones and Behavior 2012; 62(4):413–417.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bontempi C, Jacquot L, Brand G. Sex Differences in Odor Hedonic Perception: An Overview. Front Neurosci 2021; 15:764520. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2021.764520.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bryant GA, Haselton MG. Vocal cues of ovulation in human females. Biology Letters 2009; 5, 12–15.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Buss DM. Strategies of human mating. Psihologijske Teme, 2006; 15(2):239–260.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Buss DM. The evolution of human intrasexual competition: Tactics of mate attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1988; 54(4):616–628. doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.54.4.616.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Deng H, Feng J, Zhou W i wsp. Olfactory Sensitivity Is Related to Erectile Function in Adult Males. Front Cell Dev Biol 2020; 8:93. doi: 10.3389/fcell.2020.00093.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Doty RL, Ford M, Preti G. i wsp. Changes in the intensity and pleasantness of human vaginal odors during the menstrual cycle. Science 1975; 190:1316–1318.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Doty RL. Olfactory communication in humans. Chem Senses 1981; 6:351–376.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Durante KM, Li NP, Haselton MG. Changes in women’s choice of dress across the ovulatory cycle: naturalistic and laboratory task-based evidence. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2008; 34(11):1451-60. doi: 10.1177/0146167208323103.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Durante KM, Griskevicius V, Simpson, JA i wsp. Ovulation leads women to perceive sexy cads as good dads. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2012; 103(2):292–305. doi.org/10.1037/a0028498
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ellison PT. On fertile ground. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 2001.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ember M, Ember CR. Male-female bonding: A cross-species study of mammals and birds. Behavior Science Research 1979; 14:37-56.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ember M, Ember CR. Marriage, family, and kinship: Comparative studies of social organization. New Haven, CT: HRAF Press. 1983.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Feinberg DR, DeBruine LM, Jones BC i wsp. The role of femininity and averageness of voice pitch in aesthetic judgments of women’s voice. Perception 2008; 37(4):615–623. doi.org/10.1068/p5514.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Fink B, Hugill N, Lange BP. Women’s body movements are a potential cue to ovulation. Personality and Individual Differences 2012; 53(6), 759763. doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2012.06.005.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Franzoi SL, Herzog ME. Judging physical attractiveness: what body aspects do we use?. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 1987; 13:19–33.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Gangestad SW, Buss D. Pathogen prevalence and human mate preferences. Ethology and Socio-biology 1993; 14:89-96.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Gangestad SW, Simpson JA. The evolution of human mating: Trade-offs and strategic pluralism. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences 2000; 23(4):573–644.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Gangestad SW, Thornhill R, Garver C. Changes in women’s sexual interests and their partner’s mate-retention tactics across the menstrual cycle: evidence for shifting conflicts of interest. Proc R Soc Lond B 2002; 269:975–982.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Gangestad SW, Thornhill R, Garver-Apgar CE. Adaptations to ovulation. W: Buss DM (Ed.), The Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc. 344–371. 2005.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Gangestad SW, Thornhill R, Yeo RA. Facial attractiveness, developmental stability, and fluctuating asymmetry. Ethol Sociobiol 1994; 15:73–85.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Garza R. Sex Differences in Physical Attractiveness. Sexual Education Around the World – Past, Present and Future Issues. IntechOpen; 2022.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Gowaty PA. Battles of the sexes and origins of monogamy. In J. M. Black (Ed.), Partnerships in birds: The study of monogamy. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. 21-52. 1996.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Hamilton WD, Zuk M. Heritable true fitness and bright birds: A role for parasites? Science 1982; 218:384-387.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Haselton MG, Gangestad SW. Conditional expression of women’s desires and men’s mate guarding across the ovulatory cycle. Horm Behav. 2006; 49(4):509-18. doi: 10.1016/j.yhbeh.2005.10.006.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Haselton MG, Mortezaie M, Pillsworth EG. i wsp. Ovulatory shifts in human female ornamentation: Near ovulation, women dress to impress. Hormones and Behavior 2007; 51:40-45.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Havlíček J, Dvořáková R, Bartoš L i wsp. Non-Advertized does not Mean Concealed: Body Odour Changes across the Human Menstrual Cycle. Ethology 2006; 112:81-90. doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0310.2006.01125.x.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Hays WS. Human pheromones: have they been demonstrated?. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 2003; 54:89-97.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Herz RS, Cahill ED. Differential use of sensory information in sexual behavior as a function of gender. Hum Nat 1997; 8:275–286.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Hyde JS, Salk, RH. Comment: Menstrual Cycle Fluctuations in Women’s Mate Preferences. Emotion Review 2014; 6(3):253-254. doi.org/10.1177/1754073914523049.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Johnston VS, Hagel R, Franklin M i wsp. Malefacial attractiveness: evidence for hormone mediated adaptive design. Evol Hum Behav 2001; 22:251–267.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Kaplan H, Hill K, Lancaster J. i wsp. A theory of human life history evolution: Diet, intelligence, and longevity. Evolutionary Anthropology 2000; 9:156-185.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Lancaster JB, Lancaster CS. Parental investment: The hominid adaptation. W: D. Ortner (Ed.), How humans evolve. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institute Press, 33-58. 1983.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Livingston TN, Rerick PO. Men’s Physical Attractiveness Predicts Women’s Ratings of Sexual Intent through Sexual Arousal: Implications for Sexual (Mis)Communication. Sexes 2023; 4:327-340. doi.org/10.3390/sexes4030022.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Lovejoy CO. The origin of man. Science. 1981; 211(4480):341-50. doi: 10.1126/science.211.4480.341.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Low BS. Marriage systems and pathogen stress in human societies. American Zoologist 1990; 30:325-339.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Marlowe F. Male contribution to diet and female reproductive success among foragers. Current Anthropology 2001; 42:755-760. doi:10.1086/323820.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Marlowe F. The mating system of foragers in the standard cross-cultural sample. Cross-Cult Res 2003; 37:282 –306. doi:10.1177/1069397103254008.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Merkonidis C, Grosse F, Ninh T. i wsp. Characteristics of chemosensory disorders–results from a survey. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2015; 272:1403–1416. doi: 10.1007/s00405-014-3210-4.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Mesnick SL. Sexual alliances: Evidence and evolutionary implications. W: Gowaty PA (Ed.), Feminism and evolutionary biology. New York: Chapman and Hall. 207-257. 1997.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Murdock GP, White DR. Standard cross-cultural sample. Ethnology 1969; 8:329–369. doi: 10.2307/3772907.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Olsen KH, Grahn M, Lohm J i wsp. MHC and kin discrimination in juvenile Arctic charr, Salvelinus alpinus (L.). Anim Behav 1998; 56(2):319-327. doi:10.1006/anbe.1998.0837.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Pagel M. The evolution of conspicuous oestrous advertisement in Old World monkeys. Animal Behaviour 1994; 47(6):1333–1341.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Pankevich DE, Baum MJ. Cherry JA. Olfactory sex discrimination persists, whereas the preference for urinary odorants from estrous females disappears in male mice after vomeronasal organ removal. Journal of Neuroscience 2004; 24:9451–9457.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Pause BM, Sojka B, Krauel K i wsp. Olfactory information-processing during the course of the menstrual cycle. Biol Psychol 1996; 44:31–54.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Penn DJ, Potts WK. The evolution of mating preferences and major histocompatibility genes. Am Nat 1999; 153:145–164.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Penn DJ. The scent of genetic compatibility: sexual selection and the major histocompatiblity complex. Ethology 2002; 801:1–21.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Penton-Voak IS, Perrett DI, Castles DL i wsp. Female preference for male faces changes cyclically. Nature 1999; 399:741–742.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Regan PC, Berscheid E. Gender differences in beliefs about the causes of male and female sexual desire. Pers Relat 1995; 2:345–358.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Rikowski A, Grammer K, Human body odour, symmetry and attractiveness. Proc R Soc Lond B 1999; 266:869–874.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Roney JR, Simmons ZL, Gray PB. Changes in estradiol predict within-women shifts in attraction to facial cues of men’s testosterone. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2011 Jun;36(5):742-9. doi: 10.1016/j.psyneuen.2010.10.010.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Roney JR, Simmons ZL. Women’s estradiol predicts preference for facial cues of men’s testosterone.Hormones and Behavior 2007; 53:14–19.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ryan MJ. Sexual selection and mate choice. W: Krebs JR & Davies NB (Eds.), Behavioural ecology: An evolutionary approach. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell. 179-202. 1997.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Schleifenbaum L, Driebe JC, Gerlach TM i wsp. Women feel more attractive before ovulation: evidence from a large-scale online diary study. Evol Hum Sci. 2021; 3:e47. doi: 10.1017/ehs.2021.44.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Simpson JA, Gangestad SW, Lerma M. Perception of physical attractiveness: Mechanisms involved in the maintenance of romantic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1990; 59(6):1192–1201. doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.59.6.1192.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Singh D, Bronstad PM. Female body odour is a potential cue to ovulation. Proc R Soc Lond B 2001; 268:797–801.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Snell GD. Methods for the study of histocompatibility genes. J Genet 1948; 49: 87-108.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Stevenson RJ. An initial evaluation of the functions of human olfaction. Chem Senses 2010; 35:3–20. doi: 10.1093/chemse/bjp083.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Sugiyama LS. Physical attractiveness in adaptationist perspective. W: Buss DM (Ed.), The Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc. 292–343. 2005.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Thornhill R, Gangestad SW, Miller R i wsp. Major histocompatibility complex genes, symmetry, and body scent attractiveness in men and women, Behavioral Ecology 2003; 14(5):668–678, doi. org/10.1093/beheco/arg043.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Thornhill R, Gangestad SW. Facial attractiveness. Trends Cog Science 1999; 3:452–460.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Thornhill R, Gangestad SW. The scent of symmetry: a human sex pheromone that signals fitness? Evol Hum Behav 1999; 20:175–201.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Verhaeghe J, Gheysen R, Enzlin P. Pheromones and their effect on women’s mood and sexuality. Facts Views Vis Obgyn. 2013;5(3):189-95.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Wedekind C, Seebeck T, Bettens F i wsp. MHC-Dependent Mate Preferences in: Biological Sciences 1995; 260(1359):245-249.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Wiktorowicz K, Kaszkowiak K. Budowa i funkcja ludzkich antygenów zgodności tkankowej. Część 1. Kodowanie i budowa. Forum Reumatol 2018; 4(1):37–44.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Wilcox AJ, Weinberg CR, Baird DD. Timing of sexual intercourse in relation to ovulation — Effects on the probability of conception, survival of the pregnancy, and sex of the baby. The New England Journal of Medicine 1995; 333(23):1517–1521.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Yamazaki K, Boyse EA, Miké V i wsp. Control of mating preferences in mice by genes in the major histocompatibility complex. J Exp Med. 1976; 144(5):1324-35. doi: 10.1084/jem.144.5.1324.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ziegler T, Schultz-Darken NJ, Scott JJ i wsp. Neuroendocrine response to female ovulatory odors depends upon social condition in male common marmosets (Callithrix jacchus). Hormones and Behavior 2005; 47:56–64.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article

Evolutionary Aspects of the Selection of Reproductive Partners

Abstract

Paradigm

My account