Bio 495- Senior Seminar Critique
You must convert this document to a PDF before electronic submission.
Your Evaluator’s Code No. _648312__
(this keeps your identity anonymous)
Seminar Speaker:__Elizabeth Kerr__________Speaker’s Faculty adviser:____Dr. Mayer______
1. Synopsis
Elizabeth’s seminar was about sexual selection and the “sexy son” hypothesis. Sexual selection can
be subdivided into many different types: intraspecific and interspecific sexual selection, within
interspecific selection is direct and indirect benefits, and indirect benefits can be described as either
good genes or “sexy son” hypothesis. The “sexy son” hypothesis is that a female will select a male
based on trait that is attractive, not because it increases the viability of her offspring. The first study
she described looked at lekking sandflies and the benefits that females gained from mating with
certain males. It then compared the attractiveness to good gene benefits. The study concluded that
there was no evidence for direct benefits to females or indirect benefits for good genes, therefore
the results supported the “sexy son” hypothesis. The cucumber beetle study looked at whether
female’s choice is influenced by the antennae stroking rates of males. The results showed that
males accepted for mating had faster stroking rates, but there was no evidence of direct benefits to
females or indirect benefits through the good genes hypothesis, therefore the “sexy son” hypothesis
was supported. The Australian grassfinch study predicted that the reasoning for the females to
prefer certain traits was that it was a latent aesthetic mate preference. So for the study they added
head ornaments to finches in varying colors and found that the females preferred the white crest.
They concluded that their prediction could explain early evolution of sexually selected traits.
Elizabeth’s overall conclusions were that the “sexy son” hypothesis was supported and that it may
evolve through a sensory bias where preference is latent and exists before the male trait evolves.
The implications of this topic are that this theory may possibly explain speciation.
2. Evaluation - Mark with an X to what degree you agree (or not) to the following statements.
Strongly
Agree
Agree
1
The objectives of the seminar were clearly
presented.
x
2
The speaker presented background
information at an appropriate level of
detail.
x
3
Experimental methods were explained in
an appropriate level of detail.
x
4
Results were presented in a logical way
that supported the seminar’s objectives.
x
5
The speaker integrated data/results from
different studies into a cohesive seminar.
X
6
Conclusions were clearly presented.
X
Not
Sure
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Not
applicable
Page 1 of 2
Bio 495- Senior Seminar Critique
7
The seminar had a logical flow.
X
8
I learned a lot from this seminar.
X
9
The speaker kept my interest.
x
10 The speaker spoke clearly to the whole
audience.
X
11 The PowerPoint slides were clear and
visually appealing.
x
12 The graphs, figures and/or tables were
effective at making the information more
understandable.
x
13 The seminar was of adequate length, but
did not go over time.
X
14 The speaker answered questions well.
X
3. Additional comments (typed): Provide more in-depth feedback on the student’s seminar. If you want to refer to
a particular statement in the evaluation matrix (section 2), please refer to it by number.
How could the seminar be improved?
Page 2 of 2