Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25604948›Full record

ArticleHeredity2015

Bias in the heritability of preference and its potential impact on the evolution of mate choice.

D A Roff, D J Fairbairn

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heredity, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

2 authors.

D A RoffDepartment of Biology, University of California, Riverside, California, USA.
D J FairbairnDepartment of Biology, University of California, Riverside, California, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The evolution of mate choice is a function of the heritability of preference. Estimation in the laboratory is typically made by presenting a female with a limited number of males. We show that such an approach produces a downwardly biased estimate, which we term the heritability of choice. When preference is treated as a threshold trait then less biased estimates are obtained particularly for preferences based on the relative value of the preferred trait. Because females in the wild typically survey on average less than five males we argue that the heritability of choice may be more meaningful than the heritability of preference. The restricted number of males surveyed can lead to a reduction in the phenotypic variance of the preferred trait in the group of males selected by the females if the phenotypic variance in preference is equal to or less than the phenotypic variance in the referred trait. If the phenotypic variance in preference exceeds that of the preferred trait then the opposite occurs. A second effect of the restricted number of males sampled is that females are likely to mate initially with males that are not the most preferred. The failure to find the most preferred male may account for the common observation of multiple matings and extra-pair copulations. We suggest that current explanations for polyandry need to take this failure into account.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionMating Preference, AnimalModels, GeneticAnimalsBiasFemaleGenetic VariationMalePhenotype

Identifiers

PMID25604948
PMCPMC4359979

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.