{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.029601029601029602, 'fraction_numerical': 0.002574002574002574, 'mean_word_length': 6.004504504504505, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Sexual selection and ‘species recognition’ revisited: serial processing and order-of-operations in mate choice

Following the modern synthesis, mating signals were thought of principally as species recognition traits, a view later challenged by a burgeoning interest in sexual selection—specifically mate choice. In the 1990s, these different signal functions were proposed to represent a single process driven by the shape of female preference functions across both intra- and interspecific signal space. However, the properties of reliable ‘recognition’ signals (stereotyped; low intraspecific variation) and informative ‘quality’ signals (condition dependent; high intraspecific variation) seem at odds, perhaps favouring different signal components for different functions. Surprisingly, the idea that different components of mating signals are evaluated in series, first to recognize generally compatible mates and then to select for quality, has never been explicitly tested. Here I evaluate patterns of (i) intraspecific signal variation, (ii) female preference function shape and (iii) phylogenetic signal for male cricket call components known to be processed in series. The results show that signal components processed first tend to have low variation, closed preference functions and low phylogenetic signal, whereas signal components processed later show the opposite, suggesting that mating signal evaluation follows an ‘order-of-operations'. Applicability of this finding to diverse groups of organisms and sensory modalities is discussed.