ArticleEcology and evolution2016
Temporal variation in selection on male and female traits in wild tree crickets.
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A potential role for restricted intertactical heritability in preventing intralocus conflict.Evolutionary applications · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Understanding temporal variation in selection in natural populations is necessary to accurately estimate rates of divergence and macroevolutionary processes. Temporal variation in the strength and direction of selection on sex-specific traits can also explain stasis in male and female phenotype and sexual dimorphism. I investigated changes in strength and form of viability selection (via predation by wasps) in a natural population of male and female tree crickets over 4 years. I found that although the source of viability stayed the same, viability selection affected males and females differently, and the strength, direction and form of selection varied considerably from year to year. In general, males experienced significant linear selection and significant selection differentials more frequently than females, and different male traits experienced significant linear selection each year. This yearly variation resulted in overall weak but significant convex selection on a composite male trait that mostly represented leg size and wing width. Significant selection on female phenotype was uncommon, but when it was detected, it was invariably nonlinear. Significant concave selection on traits representing female body size was observed in some years, as the largest and smallest females were preyed on less (the largest may have been too heavy for flying wasps to carry). Viability selection was significantly different between males and females in 2 of 4 years. Although viability selection via predation has the potential to drive phenotypic change and sexual dimorphism, temporal variation in selection may maintain stasis.
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.