Lizard Females That Look Like Males Are Less Attractive (to Male Lizards)

In many species, male and females look different to each other. In these ‘sexually dimorphic’ species, males tend to be more ornamented. ‘Ornaments’ are basically anything that’s just for decoration with no other function, the classic example being the peacock’s tail.

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


In many species, male and females look different to each other. In these ‘sexually dimorphic’ species, males tend to be more ornamented. ‘Ornaments’ are basically anything that’s just for decoration with no other function, the classic example being the peacock’s tail.

 

Female and male humans are sexually dimorphic, but a lot less so than some other animals (I have often mistaken a women for a man, or a man for a woman, but I have never mistaken a peacock for a peahen).


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


 

 

 

In some animals, females occasionally show rudimentary forms of male traits (the particular ornament of that species). An example in humans of a female showing a male trait would be male-pattern facial hair (i.e. beards).

So-called ‘bearded ladies’ have had a tough history, with the strong social stigma associated with having male-typical facial hair. Between the 15th and 19th centuries they were even paraded in front of audiences in circus ‘freak shows’.

As science progressed and as people learned more about how such previously mysterious anomalies arose, so society started to treat those who looked different to themselves less as ‘freaks’ and more as other human beings. Interestingly, freak shows apparently do still exist, but their proponents now put a different spin on it (see here to read about ‘Black Scorpion

Male fence lizards are bright blue on their throat and on the sides of their body. A recent study has looked at how male lizards respond to female lizards that show a rudimentary version of this trait. They found that the male lizards discriminated against these females, choosing not to mate with them. The ornamented females (that I actually think look a lot prettier) reproduced less than the non-ornamented ones. They also produced eggs that hatched later, possibly because it took them longer to find a male to mate with.

Why might female ornamentation still exist in this species, if it is so detrimental? It is possible that ornamented females have some advantages outside of reproduction, for example being more socially dominant. It is also possible that these females produce better quality male offspring (with more or better ornamentation). However, the scientists did not find that the ornamented females produced more males than the non-ornamented ones, as you might expect if this were the case.

It is worth bearing in mind that this is just one species. In other species, such as some species of birds, ornamented females are actually more fecund compared to non-ornamented females. And of course, this says nothing about human ‘ornamentation’. At a fancy-dress party I was told that I was actually rather fetching with a moustache, and no one can deny that Johnny Depp looks good in makeup.

 

 

 

 

Photo Credits

Peacock & hen: Darkros

Deer: Caroline Granycome

Annie Jones: Poster, author unknown

Fence lizards: Lindsey Swierk and Courtney Norjen

Male fence lizard: Jarek Tuszynski

 

Reference

Swierk L, Langkilde T. 2013 Bearded ladies: females suffer fitness consequenceswhen bearing male traits. Biol Lett 9:20130644.

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe