ArticleHeredity2016
Reduction in the cumulative effect of stress-induced inbreeding depression due to intragenerational purging in Drosophila melanogaster.
Article in Heredity, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sex-specific inbreeding depression: A meta-analysis.Ecology letters · 2022Pooled it
- Inbreeding accelerates reproductive senescence, but not survival senescence, in a precocial bird.The Journal of animal ecology · 2024Article
- Inbreeding-Driven Innate Behavioral Changes inBiology · 2023Article
- Environment dependence of the expression of mutational load and species' range limits.Journal of evolutionary biology · 2022Article
- Article
- Genetic architecture and lifetime dynamics of inbreeding depression in a wild mammal.Nature communications · 2021Article
- Inbreeding depression by environment interactions in a free-living mammal population.Heredity · 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
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Environmental stress generally exacerbates the harmful effects of inbreeding and it has been proposed that this could be exploited in purging deleterious alleles from threatened inbred populations. However, understanding what factors contribute to variability in the strength of inbreeding depression (ID) observed across adverse environmental conditions remains a challenge. Here, we examined how the nature and timing of stress affects ID and the potential for purging using inbred and outbred Drosophila melanogaster larvae exposed to biotic (larval competition, bacteria infection) and abiotic (ethanol, heat) stressors compared with unstressed controls. ID was measured during (larval survival) and after (male mating success) stress exposure. The level of stress imposed by each stressor was approximately equal, averaging a 42% reduction in outbred larval survival relative to controls. All stressors induced on average the same ID, causing a threefold increase in lethal equivalents for larval survival relative to controls. However, stress-induced ID in larval success was followed by a 30% reduction in ID in mating success of surviving males. We propose that this fitness recovery is due to 'intragenerational purging' whereby fitness correlations facilitate stress-induced purging that increases the average fitness of survivors in later life history stages. For biotic stressors, post-stress reductions in ID are consistent with intragenerational purging, whereas for abiotic stressors, there appeared to be an interaction between purging and stress-induced physiological damage. For all stressors, there was no net effect of stress on lifetime ID compared with unstressed controls, undermining the prediction that stress enhances the effectiveness of population-level purging across generations.
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.