Abstract
The aesthetic preferences of potential mates have driven the evolution of a baffling diversity of elaborate ornaments. Which fitness benefit-if any-choosers gain from expressing such preferences is controversial, however. Here, we simulate the evolution of preferences for multiple ornament types (e.g., "Fisherian," "handicap," and "indicator" ornaments) that differ in their associations with genes for attractiveness and other components of fitness. We model the costs of preference expression in a biologically plausible way, which decouples costly mate search from cost-free preferences. Ornaments of all types evolved in our model, but their occurrence was far from random. Females typically preferred ornaments that carried information about a male's quality, defined here as his ability to acquire and metabolize resources. Highly salient ornaments, which key into preexisting perceptual biases, were also more likely to evolve. When males expressed quality-dependent ornaments, females invested readily in costly mate search to locate preferred males. In contrast, the genetic benefits associated with purely arbitrary ornaments were insufficient to sustain highly costly mate search. Arbitrary ornaments could nonetheless "piggyback" on mate-search effort favored by other, quality-dependent ornaments. We further show that the potential to produce attractive male offspring ("sexy sons") can be as important as producing offspring of high general quality ("good genes") in shaping female preferences, even when preferred ornaments are quality dependent. Our model highlights the importance of mate-search effort as a driver of aesthetic coevolution.