ArticleBiology letters2015
Functional coupling constrains craniofacial diversification in Lake Tanganyika cichlids.
Article in Biology letters, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- African cichlid fishes: morphological data and taxonomic insights from a genus-level survey of supraneurals, pterygiophores, and vertebral counts (Ovalentaria, Blenniiformes, Cichlidae, Pseudocrenilabrinae).Biodiversity data journal · 2024Article
- Rates of morphological evolution, asymmetry and morphological integration of shell shape in scallops.BMC evolutionary biology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Functional coupling, where a single morphological trait performs multiple functions, is a universal feature of organismal design. Theory suggests that functional coupling may constrain the rate of phenotypic evolution, yet empirical tests of this hypothesis are rare. In fish, the evolutionary transition from guarding the eggs on a sandy/rocky substrate (i.e. substrate guarding) to mouthbrooding introduces a novel function to the craniofacial system and offers an ideal opportunity to test the functional coupling hypothesis. Using a combination of geometric morphometrics and a recently developed phylogenetic comparative method, we found that head morphology evolution was 43% faster in substrate guarding species than in mouthbrooding species. Furthermore, for species in which females were solely responsible for mouthbrooding the males had a higher rate of head morphology evolution than in those with bi-parental mouthbrooding. Our results support the hypothesis that adaptations resulting in functional coupling constrain phenotypic evolution.
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.