Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27468306›Full record

ArticleEvolutionary applications2016

Gene flow from an adaptively divergent source causes rescue through genetic and demographic factors in two wild populations of Trinidadian guppies.

Sarah W Fitzpatrick, Jill C Gerberich, Lisa M Angeloni, Larissa L Bailey, Emily D Broder, Julian Torres-Dowdall, Corey A Handelsman, Andrés López-Sepulcre, David N Reznick, Cameron K Ghalambor and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Evolutionary applications, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed
9.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 82 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Genetic Rescue: Latest Advances and Applications.Evolutionary applications · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

11 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Sarah W FitzpatrickKellogg Biological Station Department of Integrative Biology Michigan State University Hickory Corners MI USA; Department of Biology Colorado State University Fort Collins CO USA.
Jill C GerberichDepartment of Biology Colorado State University Fort Collins CO USA.
Lisa M AngeloniDepartment of Biology Colorado State University Fort Collins CO USA; Graduate Degree Program in Ecology Colorado State University Fort Collins CO USA.
Larissa L BaileyDepartment of Fish, Wildlife, and Conservation Biology Colorado State University Fort Collins CO USA.
Emily D BroderDepartment of Biology Colorado State University Fort Collins CO USA; Graduate Degree Program in Ecology Colorado State University Fort Collins CO USA.
Julian Torres-DowdallLehrstuhl für Zoologie und Evolutionsbiologie Department of Biology University of Konstanz Konstanz Germany.
Corey A HandelsmanDepartment of Biology Colorado State University Fort Collins CO USA.
Andrés López-SepulcreCNRS UMR 7618 Institute of Ecology and Environmental Sciences of Paris (iEES) Université Pierre et Marie Curie Paris France; Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences Center of Excellence in Biological Interactions University of Jyväskylä Jyväskylä Finland.
David N ReznickDepartment of Biology University of California Riverside CA USA.
Cameron K GhalamborDepartment of Biology Colorado State University Fort Collins CO USA; Graduate Degree Program in Ecology Colorado State University Fort Collins CO USA.
W Chris FunkDepartment of Biology Colorado State University Fort Collins CO USA; Graduate Degree Program in Ecology Colorado State University Fort Collins CO USA.
Colorado State University · USMichigan State University · USSorbonne Université · FRUniversity of California, Riverside · USUniversity of Konstanz · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genetic rescue, an increase in population growth owing to the infusion of new alleles, can aid the persistence of small populations. Its use as a management tool is limited by a lack of empirical data geared toward predicting effects of gene flow on local adaptation and demography. Experimental translocations provide an ideal opportunity to monitor the demographic consequences of gene flow. In this study we take advantage of two experimental introductions of Trinidadian guppies to test the effects of gene flow on downstream native populations. We individually marked guppies from the native populations to monitor population dynamics for 3 months before and 26 months after gene flow. We genotyped all individuals caught during the first 17 months at microsatellite loci to classify individuals by their genetic ancestry: native, immigrant, F1 hybrid, F2 hybrid, or backcross. Our study documents a combination of demographic and genetic rescue over multiple generations under fully natural conditions. Within both recipient populations, we found substantial and long-term increases in population size that could be attributed to high survival and recruitment caused by immigration and gene flow from the introduction sites. Our results suggest that low levels of gene flow, even from a divergent ecotype, can provide a substantial demographic boost to small populations, which may allow them to withstand environmental stochasticity.

Indexed as

capture‐mark‐recapturedemographic rescuefitnessgene flowgenetic rescuehybridizationPoecilia reticulatapopulation growth

Identifiers

PMID27468306
PMCPMC4947150
OpenAlexW2238756921

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.