Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25237131›Full record

ReviewCold Spring Harbor perspectives in biology2014

Sexual conflict in hermaphrodites.

Lukas Schärer, Tim Janicke, Steven A Ramm

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in biology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

44 citing papers in PubMed, 117 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. The resolution of evolutionary conflicts within species.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2024
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Sexual antagonism in sequential hermaphrodites.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Lukas SchärerEvolutionary Biology, Zoological Institute, University of Basel, 4051 Basel, Switzerland.
Tim JanickeCentre d'Écologie Fonctionnelle et Évolutive, CNRS UMR 5175, 34293 Montpellier Cedex 05, France.
Steven A RammEvolutionary Biology, Bielefeld University, 33615 Bielefeld, Germany.
Bielefeld University · DECentre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRUniversity of Basel · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Hermaphrodites combine the male and female sex functions into a single individual, either sequentially or simultaneously. This simple fact means that they exhibit both similarities and differences in the way in which they experience, and respond to, sexual conflict compared to separate-sexed organisms. Here, we focus on clarifying how sexual conflict concepts can be adapted to apply to all anisogamous sexual systems and review unique (or especially important) aspects of sexual conflict in hermaphroditic animals. These include conflicts over the timing of sex change in sequential hermaphrodites, and in simultaneous hermaphrodites, over both sex roles and the postmating manipulation of the sperm recipient by the sperm donor. Extending and applying sexual conflict thinking to hermaphrodites can identify general evolutionary principles and help explain some of the unique reproductive diversity found among animals exhibiting this widespread but to date understudied sexual system.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionModels, BiologicalAnimalsFemaleGenetic FitnessHermaphroditic OrganismsMaleReproductionSex Determination ProcessesSexual Behavior, Animal

Identifiers

PMID25237131
PMCPMC4292172
OpenAlexW2167811915

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.