Sexually antagonistic selection on primate size

Male intrasexual selection in haplorhine primates has previously been shown to increase male size and to a lesser degree also female size. I address the following questions: (1) why does female size increase when the selection is on males, and (2) why does female size not increase to the same extent as that of males. The potential for correlational selection on females through increased resource competition was analysed with independent contrasts analyses. No such effect was found, nor did matched pairs comparisons reveal females to increase in size because of selection to bear larger male offspring. Instead further matched pairs analyses revealed higher female postpartum investment, as indicated by a longer lactation period, in more sexually selected species, also after correcting for body weight. Concerning the second question, independent contrast analyses showed that large size has had negative effects on female reproductive rate across the primate order. Matched‐pairs analyses on haplorhines revealed that females of species in more polygynous clades have lower reproductive rates than females of species in less polygynous clades. This is also true after the effects of body weight are removed. These results, both when correcting for body weight and when not, suggest that sexual selection has shifted female size from one favouring female lifetime fecundity to one favouring male success in competition. This depicts antagonistic selection pressures on female size and a trade‐off for females between the ecologically optimal size of their foremothers and the larger size that made their forefathers successful.