Current analyses do not resolve whether extra-pair paternity is male or female driven

Recent studies question the importance of indirect genetic effects in explaining female benefits of extra-pair matings in socially monogamous species. Compiling data on 14 wild bird species, Arnqvist and Kirkpatrick (Am Nat 165:S26–S37, 2005) estimated the average direct cost in terms or reduced parental care to be an order of magnitude larger than the potential effect of genetic benefits. This study has sparked a debate regarding potential confounding factors but no consensus appears to have been reached. Here we focus on the implicit assumption that all individuals face the same selective pressures and argue that this assumption is probably too strong in most cases. Using a theoretical model we show that when the amount of resources that a male provides depends on territory quality, his physical condition or prospects for alternative breeding opportunities, a female may respond to such differences by altering her mating behaviour. Such confounding factors may lead to direct fitness effects that result in negative correlations between paternal care and paternity even if females that produce extra-pair young experience a net benefit. Negative correlations can also result when males forcefully seek copulations and females resist them. We discuss the studies included in the analysis in this light, and conclude that current analyses on the net selective pressures remain uninformative. In addition to considering average effects across individuals and species we suggest giving attention to individual differences and the influence of ecological factors such as territory quality and predation pressures on female mating behaviour.