Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28250180›Full record

ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2017

Sexual conflict over remating interval is modulated by the

Damian T Smith, Naomi V E Clarke, James M Boone, Claudia Fricke, Tracey Chapman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. The evolution of sex peptide: sexual conflict, cooperation, and coevolution.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2022
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. ThePhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2020
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Sexual conflict over remating interval is modulated by theProceedings. Biological sciences · 2017
    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

5 authors.

Damian T SmithSchool of Biological Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich Research Park, Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK.
Naomi V E ClarkeSchool of Biological Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich Research Park, Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK.
James M BooneSchool of Biological Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich Research Park, Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK.
Claudia FrickeInstitute for Evolution and Biodiversity, University of Muenster, Huefferstr. 1, 48149 Muenster, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0691-6779
Tracey ChapmanSchool of Biological Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich Research Park, Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK tracey.chapman@uea.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2401-8120

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/H008047/1Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/L003139/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sexual conflict, in which the evolutionary interests of males and females diverge, shapes the evolution of reproductive systems across diverse taxa. Here, we used the fruit fly to study sexual conflict in natural, three-way interactions comprising a female, her current and previous mates. We manipulated the potential for sexual conflict by using

Indexed as

Sexual Behavior, AnimalAnimalsDrosophila melanogasterDrosophila ProteinsFemaleFertilityIntercellular Signaling Peptides and ProteinsMalePeptidesReceptors, PeptideReproductionDrosophila ProteinsIntercellular Signaling Peptides and ProteinsPeptidesReceptors, Peptidesex peptide receptor, DrosophilaSP protein, DrosophilaDrosophila melanogastersexual conflictsexual selectionsperm competition

Identifiers

PMID28250180
PMCPMC5360916

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.