ArticleEcology and evolution2014
Sexual size dimorphism is not associated with the evolution of parental care in frogs.
Article in Ecology and evolution, 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evolutionary trade-offs between testes size and parenting in Neotropical glassfrogs.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2024Article
- Influence of microhabitat, fecundity, and parental care on the evolution of sexual size dimorphism in Caribbean Eleutherodactylus frogs.Evolution; international journal of organic evolution · 2022Article
- Parental care and the evolution of terrestriality in frogs.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2019Article
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
Sex differences in parental care are thought to arise from differential selection on the sexes. Sexual dimorphism, including sexual size dimorphism (SSD), is often used as a proxy for sexual selection on males. Some studies have found an association between male-biased SSD (i.e., males larger than females) and the loss of paternal care. While the relationship between sexual selection on males and parental care evolution has been studied extensively, the relationship between female-biased SSD (i.e., females larger than males) and the evolution of parental care has received very little attention. Thus, we have little knowledge of whether female-biased SSD coevolves with parental care. In species displaying female-biased SSD, we might expect dimorphism to be associated with the evolution of paternal care or perhaps the loss of maternal care. Here, drawing on data for 99 extant frog species, we use comparative methods to evaluate how parental care and female-biased SSD have evolved over time. Generally, we find no significant correlation between the evolution of parental care and female-biased SSD in frogs. This suggests that differential selection on body size between the sexes is unlikely to have driven the evolution of parental care in these clades and questions whether we should expect sexual dimorphism to exhibit a general relationship with the evolution of sex differences in parental care.
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.