ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2014
A population of sexual Daphnia pulex resists invasion by asexual clones.
Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Loss and gain of sexual reproduction in the same stick insect.Molecular ecology · 2019Article
- Adaptations to different habitats in sexual and asexual populations of parasitoid wasps: a meta-analysis.PeerJ · 2017Article
- Reproductive switching analysis of Daphnia similoides between sexual female and parthenogenetic female by transcriptome comparison.Scientific reports · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Asexual reproduction avoids the costs associated with sex, predicting that invading asexual clones can quickly replace sexual populations. Daphnia pulex populations in the Great Lakes area are predominately asexual, but the elimination of sexual populations by invading clones is poorly understood. Asexual clones were detected at low frequency in one rare sexual population in 1995, with some increase in frequency during 2003 and 2004. However, these clones remained at low frequency during further yearly sampling (2005-2013) with no evidence that the resident sexual population was in danger of elimination. There was evidence for hybridization between rare males produced by asexual clones and sexual females with the potential to produce new asexual genotypes and spread the genetic factors for asexuality. In a short-term laboratory competition experiment, the two most common asexual clones did not increase in frequency relative to a genetically diverse sexual population due in part to a greater investment in diapausing eggs that trades-off current population growth for increased contribution to the egg bank. Our results suggest that a successful invasion can be prolonged, requiring a combination of clonal genotypes with high fitness, persistence of clones in the egg bank and negative factors affecting the sexual population such as inbreeding depression resulting from population bottlenecks.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.