It has been 25years since the formalization of the Sensory Drive hypothesis was published in the American Naturalist （1992）. Since then, there has been an explosion of research identifying its utility in contributin...It has been 25years since the formalization of the Sensory Drive hypothesis was published in the American Naturalist （1992）. Since then, there has been an explosion of research identifying its utility in contributing to our understanding of inter- and intra-specific variation in sensory systems and signaling properties. The main tenet of Sensory Drive is that environmental characteristics will influence the evolutionary trajectory of both sensory （detecting capabilities） and signaling （detectable features and behaviors） traits in predictable directions. We review the accumulating evidence in 154 studies addressing these questions and categorized their approach in terms of testing for environmental influence on sensory tuning, signal characteristics, or both. For the subset of studies that examined sensory tuning, there was greater support for Sensory Drive processes shaping visual than auditory tuning, and it was more prevalent in aquatic than terrestrial habitats. Terrestrial habitats and visual traits were the prevalent habitat and sensory modality in the 104 studies showing support for environmental influence on signaling properties. An additional 19 studies that found no supporting evidence for environmental influence on signaling traits were all based in terrestrial ecosystems and almost exclusively involved auditory signals. Only 29 studies examined the complete coevolutionary process between sensory and signaling traits and were dominated by fish visual communication. We discuss biophysical factors that may contribute to the visual and aquatic bias for Sensory Drive evidence, as well as biotic factors that may contribute to the lack of Sensory Drive processes in terrestrial acoustic signaling systems.展开更多
In 1992, The American Naturalist published a special supplement entitled： ＂Sensory Drive. Does Sensory Drive Biology Bias or Constrain the Direction of Evolution？＂ organized by John Endler. The supplement containe...In 1992, The American Naturalist published a special supplement entitled： ＂Sensory Drive. Does Sensory Drive Biology Bias or Constrain the Direction of Evolution？＂ organized by John Endler. The supplement contained a seminal paper on ＂sensory drive＂ by Endler （1992a） as well as several other well-cited papers on sensory exploitation （Ryan and Keddy-Hector 1992）.展开更多
文摘It has been 25years since the formalization of the Sensory Drive hypothesis was published in the American Naturalist （1992）. Since then, there has been an explosion of research identifying its utility in contributing to our understanding of inter- and intra-specific variation in sensory systems and signaling properties. The main tenet of Sensory Drive is that environmental characteristics will influence the evolutionary trajectory of both sensory （detecting capabilities） and signaling （detectable features and behaviors） traits in predictable directions. We review the accumulating evidence in 154 studies addressing these questions and categorized their approach in terms of testing for environmental influence on sensory tuning, signal characteristics, or both. For the subset of studies that examined sensory tuning, there was greater support for Sensory Drive processes shaping visual than auditory tuning, and it was more prevalent in aquatic than terrestrial habitats. Terrestrial habitats and visual traits were the prevalent habitat and sensory modality in the 104 studies showing support for environmental influence on signaling properties. An additional 19 studies that found no supporting evidence for environmental influence on signaling traits were all based in terrestrial ecosystems and almost exclusively involved auditory signals. Only 29 studies examined the complete coevolutionary process between sensory and signaling traits and were dominated by fish visual communication. We discuss biophysical factors that may contribute to the visual and aquatic bias for Sensory Drive evidence, as well as biotic factors that may contribute to the lack of Sensory Drive processes in terrestrial acoustic signaling systems.
文摘In 1992, The American Naturalist published a special supplement entitled： ＂Sensory Drive. Does Sensory Drive Biology Bias or Constrain the Direction of Evolution？＂ organized by John Endler. The supplement contained a seminal paper on ＂sensory drive＂ by Endler （1992a） as well as several other well-cited papers on sensory exploitation （Ryan and Keddy-Hector 1992）.
