In yet another way the correctness of the Darwinian theory of sexual
selection may be deduced from the markings and coloration of birds and
butterflies.
It has frequently struck me, during the long period in which I have
been studying brightly coloured birds and butterflies, that those
colour-patterns which are referable to sexual selection are much
simpler than those which must be referred to species-selection,
especially in the case of what we call 'sympathetic coloration.' How
crude is the decorative pattern of most parrots, notwithstanding all
the brilliance of their colour. Large tracts of the body are red,
others green, yellow, blue, and occasionally one finds a red and
blue striped feather collar, a head which is red above and yellow
underneath, but it is seldom that the colours vary enough in a small
space to give rise to a delicate decorative pattern. The gayest of
parrots are the Brush Tongues (_Trichoglossus_), and even among them
subtlety of coloration does not go further than the combination of
three colours on one of the long tail-feathers, or the production of
a double band round the neck, and so forth. If we compare with this
the complex markings of the inconspicuously coloured females of the
pheasants, of the partridges, or that of the upper surface of the
many birds in mingled grey, blackish-brown and white, which resemble
the ground or the dried leaves when they crouch, we find that the
colour-pattern in these cases is infinitely finer and more complex.
This seems to me quite intelligible when we remember, on the one hand,
that species-selection must operate far more intensively than sexual
selection, and that in the production of a protective colouring it is
a question of deceiving the eye of a sharp-sighted enemy, while the
aim of sexual selection is to secure the approval of others of the
same species. As long as the enemy on the search for prey perceives
the difference between the markings of its victim and those of the
surroundings, so long will the gradual and steady improvement of the
protective coloration continue, so long will new shades and new lines
be added. We can thus understand how there would be gradually reached
a complexity of marking to which sexual selection can never attain,
or at least only in regard to a few specially favourable points.
The eye-spots on the train feathers of the Argus pheasant and the
peacock are such points, and these occur among polygamous birds in
which sexual selection must be very intense; they are placed, too,
on a part of the body, the wheel-shaped train, which is peculiarly
suited for communicating the excitement of the male to the female, and
must therefore be especially influenced by the latter. In general,
however, we may say on _a priori_ grounds that the intensity of
species-selection is greater than that of sexual selection, because the
former ceaselessly and pitilessly eliminates the less perfect, while
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account