Generality 1: Not all sexually selected traits are ecologically potent. This is seen when traits are chunked up among a few different categories (e.g., behavior, intrasexually selected weapons, ornaments and displays). One could argue for a different categorization, but I think this works ok.
This review was really about getting others to try and view the evolutionary ecology of natural populations through the lens of sexual selection. Ultimately, if we want to integrate sexual selection into and eco-evolutionary framework there is a lot of work left to do. First, evidence for ecological feedbacks of sexual trait evolution are generally lacking despite evidence that sexually selected traits can evolve on contemporary timeframes (Svensson 2019). Second, we need to spend more time thinking about the role of sexual selection in intraspecific ecological diversity (De Lisle 2019, Fryxell et al. 2019). And third, development of eco-evolutionary frameworks that integrate sexual selection will require advancement of fitness-based perspectives as well as trait-based ones.
I don't see conceptual or practical impediments to this integration of sexual selection and ecology. How then, might we promote a fuller view of evolutionary ecology? I suppose the quote below offers some insight:
De Lisle, S. P. 2019. Understanding the evolution of ecological sex differences: integrating
character displacement and the Darwin-Bateman paradigm. EcoEvoRxiv:
Fryxell, D. C., D. E. Weiler, M. T. Kinnison, and E. P. Palkovacs. 2019. Eco-evolutionary
Giery, S. T., and C. A. Layman. 2019. Ecological consequences of sexually selected traits:
Svensson, E. I. 2019. Eco-evolutionary dynamics of sexual selection and sexual conflict.