Lanlan ZHANG,Ying JIANG,Li ZHAO and Wenbo LIAO.Inverse of Rensch’s Rule of Allometry for Sexual Size Dimorphism in Bufo andrewsi[J].Asian Herpetological Research(AHR),2023,14(1):95-102.[doi:10.16373/j.cnki.ahr.220066]
Click Copy

Inverse of Rensch’s Rule of Allometry for Sexual Size Dimorphism in Bufo andrewsi
Share To:

Asian Herpetological Research[ISSN:2095-0357/CN:51-1735/Q]

2023 VoI.14 No.1
Research Field:
Publishing date:


Inverse of Rensch’s Rule of Allometry for Sexual Size Dimorphism in Bufo andrewsi
Lanlan ZHANG13# Ying JIANG12# Li ZHAO13* and Wenbo LIAO13*
1 Key Laboratory of Southwest China Wildlife Resources Conservation (Ministry of Education), China West Normal University, Nanchong 637009, Sichuan, China
2 School of Ecology and Nature Conservation, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083, China
3 Key Laboratory of Artificial Propagation and Utilization in Anurans of Nanchong City, China West Normal University, Nanchong 637009, Sichuan, China
body size Bufo andrewsi hyperallometric Rensch’s rule sexual size dimorphism
Difference in body size between males and females (sexual size dimorphism: SSD) and its variation are a common phenomenon in animal kingdom. Rensch’s rule predicts that the degree of SSD variation increases with the enlarged mean body size when males are larger than females and decreases when females are larger than males. Here, whether the patterns of variations in SSD in the Andrew’s toad (Bufo andrewsi) follow Rensch’s rule was tested using unpublished data from 14 populations and published data from 17 populations. Results show the reduced major axis regression of log10 (male size) on log10 (female size) across all populations displayed a significant hyper-allometric relationship, which was consistent with inverse Rensch’s rule (the degree of SSD increased with enlarged mean body size). SSD could also be explained by sexual age difference (SAD) due to a positive SSD–SAD relationship among all populations. The findings suggest that the occurrence of inverse Rensch’s rule in B. andrewsi is likely to be a result of fecundity selection on increased reproductive investments in larger females.


Adams D. C., Glynne E., Kaliontzopoulou A. 2020. Interspecific allometry for sexual shape dimorphism: Macroevolution of multivariate sexual phenotypes with application to Rensch’s rule. Evolution, 74(9): 1908–1922
Andersen N. M. 1997. A phylogenetic analysis of the evolution of sexual dimorphism and mating systems in water striders (Hemiptera: Gerridae). Biol J Linn Soc, 61(3): 345–368
Andersson M. 1994. Sexual selection. Princeton, USA: Princeton University Press
Angilletta M. J., Dunham A. E. 2003. The temperature-size rule in ectotherms: simple evolutionary explanations may not be general. Am Nat, 162(3): 332–342
Balciauskas L., Amshokova A., Balciauskiene L., Benedek A. M., Cichocki J., Csanady A., De Mendonca P. G., Nistreanu V. 2020. Geographical clines in the size of the herb field mouse (Apodemus uralensis). Integr Zool, 15(1): 55–68
Barneche D. R., Robertson D. R., White C. R., Marshall D. J. 2018. Fish reproductive-energy output increases disproportionately with body size. Science, 360(6389): 642–645
Bates D., Maechler M., Bolker B., Walker S. 2015. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J Stat Soft, 67(1): 1–48
Berry J. F., Shine R. 1980. Sexual size dimorphism and sexual selection in turtles (order Testudines). Oecologia, 44(2): 185–191
Blanckenhorn W. U. 2005. Behavioural causes and consequences of sexual size dimorphism. Ethology, 111(11): 977–1016
Burbrink F. T., Futterman I. 2019. Female-biased gape and body-size dimorphism in the New World watersnakes (tribe: Thamnophiini) oppose predictions from Rensch’s rule. Ecol Evol, 9(17): 9624–9633
Cai L., Yu J. P., Mai C. L., Liao W. B. 2020. The effects of prey items diversity and digestible materials in stomach on digestive tract length in Hylarana guentheri. Asian Herpetol Res. 11(2):155–160
Ceballos C. P., Adams D. C., Iverson J. B., Valenzuela N. 2013. Phylogenetic patterns of sexual size dimorphism in turtles and their implications for Rensch’s rule. Evol Biol, 40: 194–208
Clifton I. T., Chamberlain J. D., Gifford M. E. 2020. Role of phenotypic plasticity in morphological differentiation between water snake populations. Integr Zool, 15(4): 329–337
Clutton-Brock T. H., Albon S. D., Guinness F. E. 1985. Parental investment and sex differences in juvenile mortality in birds and mammals. Nature, 313: 131–133
Clutton-Brock T. H., Harvey P., Rudder B. 1977. Sexual dimorphism, socionomic sex ratio and body weight in primates. Nature, 269: 797–800
Colwell R. K. 2000. Rensch’s rule crosses the line: convergent allometry of sexual size dimorphism in hummingbirds and flower mites. Am Nat, 156(5): 495–510
Cox R. M., Kelly S. L., John-Adler H. B. 2003. A comparative test of adaptive hypotheses for sexual size dimorphism in lizards. Evolution, 57(7): 1653–1669
Dale J., Dunn P. O., Figuerola J., Lislevand T., Székely T, Whittingham L. A. 2007. Sexual selection explains Rensch’s rule of allometry for sexual size dimorphism. Proc R Soc Lond B, 274(1628): 2971–2979
Darwin C. 1871. The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex. London, UK: Murray
Donihue C. M., Daltry J. C., Challenger S., Herrel A. 2021. Population increase and changes in behavior and morphology in the Critically Endangered Redonda ground lizard (Pholidoscelis atratus) following the successful removal of alien rats and goats. Integr Zool, 16(3): 379–389
Fairbairn D. J. 1997. Allometry for sexual size dimorphism: Pattern and process in the coevolution of body size in males and females. Annu Rev Ecol Ecol S, 28: 659–687
Fairbairn D. J. 2005. Allometry for sexual size dimorphism: Testing two hypotheses for Rensch’s rule in the water strider Aquarius remigis. Am Nat, 166(Suppl 4): S69–S84
Fairbairn D. J., Preziosi R. F. 1994. Sexual selection and the evolution of allometry for sexual size dimorphism in the water strider (Aquarius remigis). Am Nat, 144(1): 101–118.
Fei L., Ye C. Y. 2001. The colour handbook of amphibians of Sichuan. Beijing, China: China Forestry
Ferretti F., Fattorini N. 2021. Competitor densities, habitat and weather: effects on interspecific interactions between wild deer species. Integr Zool, 16(5): 670–684
Fr?dlová P., Frynta, D. 2010. A test of Rensch’s rule in varanid lizards. Biol J Linn Soc, 100(2): 293–306
Giacomini G., Herrel A., Chaverri G., Brown R. P., Russo D., Scaravelli D., Meloro C. 2022. Functional correlates of skull shape in Chiroptera: feeding and echolocation adaptations. Integr Zool, 17(3): 430–442
Guo B. C., Lu D., Liao W. B., Meril? J. 2016. Genome-wide scan for adaptive differentiation along altitudinal gradient in the Andrew’s toad Bufo andrewsi. Mol Ecol, 25(16): 3884–3900
Hemelaar A. S. M. 1981. Age distribution of male Bufo bufo (Amphibia: Anura) from the Netherlands, based on year rings in phalanges. Amphib-Reptil, 1(3): 223–233
Herczeg G., Gonda A., Merila J. 2010. Rensch’s rule inverted—female-driven gigantism in nine-spined stickleback Pungitius pungitius. J Anim Ecol, 79(3): 581–588
Jiang Y., Zhao L., Luan X. F., Liao W. B. 2022. Testis size variation and its environmental correlates in Andrew’s toad (Bufo andrewsi). Animals, 12(21): 3011
Jiménez-Arcos V. H., Sanabria-Urbán S., Castillo R. C. 2017. The interplay between natural and sexual selection in the evolution of sexual size dimorphism in Sceloporus lizards (Squamata: Phrynosomatidae). Ecol Evol, 7(3): 905–917
Johansson F., Crowley P. H., Brodin T. 2005. Sexual size dimorphism and sex ratios in dragonflies (Odonata). Biol J Linn Soc, 86(4): 507–513
Krasnov B. R., Surkova E. N., Shenbrot G. I., Khokhlova I. S. 2022. Latitudinal gradients in body size and sexual size dimorphism in fleas: males drive Bergmann’s pattern. Integr Zool, DOI: 10.1111/1749-4877.12686
Lengkeek W., Didderen K., Cote I. M., van der Zee E. M., Snook R. C., Reynolds J. D. 2008. Plasticity in sexual size dimorphism and Rensch’s rule in Mediterranean blennies (Blenniidae). Can J Zool, 86: 1173–1178
Liang T., Meiri S., Shi L. 2022. Sexual size dimorphism in lizards: Rensch’s rule, reproductive mode, clutch size, and line fitting method effects. Integr Zool, 17(5): 787–803
Liao W. B. 2013. Evolution of sexual size dimorphism in a frog obeys the inverse of Rensch’s rule. Evol Biol, 40: 493–499
Liao W. B., Chen W. 2012. Inverse Rensch-rule in a frog with female-biased sexual size dimorphism. Naturwissenschaften, 99(5): 427–431
Liao W. B., Jiang Y., Li D. Y., Jin L., Zhong M. J., Qi Y., Lüpold S., Kotrschal A. 2022. Cognition contra camouflage: How the brain mediates predator-driven crypsis evolution. Sci Adv, 8(33): eabq1878
Liao W. B., Liu W. C., Meril?, J. 2015. Andrew meets Rensch: Sexual size dimorphism and the inverse of Rensch’s rule in Andrew’s toad (Bufo andrewsi). Oecologia, 177(2): 389–399
Liao W. B., Lu X. 2009a. Male mate choice in the Andrew’s toad Bufo andrewsi: a preference for larger females. J Ethol, 27: 413–417
Liao W. B., Lu X. 2009b. Sex recognition by male Andrew’s toad Bufo andrewsi in a subtropical montane region. Behav Proc, 82(1): 100–103
Liao W. B., Lu X. 2010. Age and growth of a subtropical high-elevation torrent frog, Amolops mantzorum, in western China. J Herpetol, 44(1): 172–176
Liao W. B., Lu X. 2011. Proximate mechanisms leading to large male-mating advantage in the Andrew’s toad Bufo andrewsi. Behaviour, 148(9): 1087–1102.
Liao W. B., Lu X. 2012. Adult body size = f (initial size + growth rate × age): explaining the proximate cause of Bergman’s cline in a toad along altitudinal gradients. Evol Ecol, 26(3): 579–590
Liao W. B., Zeng Y., Zhou C. Q., Jehle R. 2013. Sexual size di morphism in anurans fails to obey Rensch’s rule. Front Zool, 10(1): 10
Liao, W. B. 2009. Elevational variation in the life-history of anurans in a subtropics montane forest of Sichuan, southwestern China. Ph.D. Thesis. Wuhan University
Liker A., Bókony V., Pipoly I., Lema?tre J. F., Gaillard J. M., Székely T., Freckleton R. P. 2021. Evolution of large males is associated with female-skewed adult sex ratios in amniotes. Evolution, 75(7): 1636–1649
Lou S. L., Jin L., Liu Y. H., Mi Z. P., Tao G., Tang Y. M., Liao W. B. 2012. Altitudinal variation in age and body size in Yunnan Pond Frog (Pelophylax pleuraden). Zool Sci, 29(8): 493–498
Lu D., Zhou C. Q., Liao W. B. 2014. Pattern of sexual size dimorphism supports the inverse Rensch’s rule in two frog species. Anim Biol, 64(1): 87–95
Monnet J. M., Cherry M. I. 2002. Sexual size dimorphism in anurans. Proc R Soc Lond B, 269(1507): 2301–2307
Munoz-munoz F., Pages N., Durao A. F., England M., Werner D., Talavera S. 2021. Narrow versus broad: sexual dimorphism in the wing form of western European species of the subgenus Avaritia (Culicoides, Ceratopogonidae). Integr Zool, 16(5): 769–784
Olarte O., Sanchez-Montes G., Martinez-Solano I. 2020. Integrative demographic study of the Iberian painted frog (Discoglossus galganoi): inter-annual variation in the effective to census population size ratio, with insights on mating system and breeding success. Integr Zool, 15(6): 498–510
Payne R. B. 1984. Sexual selection, lek and arena behavior, and sexual size dimorphism in birds. Ornithol Monogr, 33: 1–52.
Pe?alver-Alcázar M., Galán P., Aragón P. 2019. Assessing Rensch’s rule in a newt: Roles of primary productivity and conspecific density in interpopulation variation of sexual size dimorphism. J Biogeogr, 46(11): 2558–2569
Peng Z. W., Zhang L. X., Lu X. 2022. Global gaps in age data based on skeletochronology for amphibians. Integr Zool, 17(5): 752–763
Polák J., Frynta D. 2009. Sexual size dimorphism in domestic goats, sheep, and their wild relatives. Biol J Linn Soc, 98(4): 872–883
Polák J., Frynta D. 2010. Patterns of sexual size dimorphism in cattle breeds support Rensch’s rule. Evol Ecol, 24(5): 1255–1266
Preziosi R. F., Fairbairn D. J. 2000. Lifetime selection on adult body size and components of body size in a waterstrider: opposing selection and maintenance of sexual size dimorphism. Evolution, 54(2): 558–566
Ren Y., Song S. Y., Liu X. Y., Yang M. 2022. Phenotypic changes in the metabolic profile and adiponectin activity during seasonal fattening and hibernation in female Daurian ground squirrels (Spermophilus dauricus). Integr Zool, 17(2): 297–310.
Rensch B. 1950. Die Abh?ngigkeit der relativen sexualdifferenz von der K?rpergr?sse. Bonn Zool Beitr, 1: 58–69
Selander R. K. 1966. Sexual dimorphism and differential niche utilization in birds. Condor, 68(2): 113–151
Serrano-Meneses M. A., Cordoba-Aguilar A., Azpilicueta-Amorin M., Gonzalez-Soriano E., Székely T. 2009. Sexual selection, sexual size dimorphism and Rensch’s rule in Odonata. J Evol Biol, 21(5): 1259–1273
Shine R. 1979. Sexual selection and sexual dimorphism in the amphibia. Copeia, 1979(2): 297–306
Smith R. J., Cheverud J. M. 2002. Scaling of sexual dimorphism in body mass: a phylogenetic analysis of Rensch’s rule in Primates. Int J Primat, 23(5): 1095–1135
Sokal R. R., Rohlf F. J. 1981. Biometry: the principles and practice of statistics in biological research. San Francisco, USA: Freeman
Starostova Z., Kubica L., Kratochvil L. 2010. Macroevolutionary pattern of sexual size dimorphism in geckos corresponds to intraspecific temperature-induced variation. J Evol Biol, 23(4): 670–677
Székely T., Freckleton R. B., Reynolds J. D. 2004. Sexual selection explains Rensch’s rule of size dimorphism in shorebirds. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 101(33): 12224–12227
Székely T., Reynolds J. D., Figuerola J. 2000. Sexual size dimorphism in shorebirds, gulls and alcids: the influence of sexual and natural selection. Evolution, 54(4): 1404–1413
Teder T., Tammaru T. 2005. Sexual size dimorphism within species increases with body size in insects. Oiko, 108(2): 321–334
Webb T. J., Freckleton R. P. 2007. Only half right: Species with female-biased sexual size dimorphism consistently break Rensch’s rule. PLoS One, 2(9): e897
Xiong J. L., Guo J. P., Huang Y., Zhang B. W., Ren H. T., Pan T. 2020. Age and body size of the Shangcheng Stout Salamander Pachyhynobius shangchengensis (Caudata: Hynobiidae) from Southeastern China. Asian Herpetol Res, 11(3): 219–224
Young K. A. 2005. Life-history variation and allometry for sexual size dimorphism in Pacific salmon and trout. Proc R Soc B, 272(1559): 167–172
Zamora-camacho F. J. 2022. Sex and habitat differences in size and coloration of an amphibian’s poison glands match differential predator pressures. Integr Zool, 17(5): 764–776
Zhang L. X., Lu X. 2013. Sexual size dimorphism in anurans: ontogenetic determination revealed by an across-species comparison. Evol Biol, 40(1): 84–91
Zhu X., Chen C., Jiang Y., Zhao L., Jin L. 2022. Geographical variation of organ size in Andrew’s toad (Bufo andrewsi). Front Ecol Evol, 10: 972942


Last Update: 2023-03-25