ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2017
The Red Queen and King in finite populations.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evolution of noisy learning in games.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Quantitative system drift.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Asymmetric arms races between predators and prey: a tug of war between the life-dinner principle and the rare-enemy principle.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2024Article
- Evolutionary dynamics of hyperbolic language.PLoS computational biology · 2023Article
- Divergent paths in the evolutionary history of maternally transmitted clam symbionts.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2022Article
- Should we hail the Red King? Evolutionary consequences of a mutualistic lifestyle in genomes of lichenized ascomycetes.Ecology and evolution · 2022Article
- Microbial evolution and transitions along the parasite-mutualist continuum.Nature reviews. Microbiology · 2021Review
- How long do Red Queen dynamics survive under genetic drift? A comparative analysis of evolutionary and eco-evolutionary models.BMC evolutionary biology · 2020Article
- α-Rank: Multi-Agent Evaluation by Evolution.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Social Closure and the Evolution of Cooperation via Indirect Reciprocity.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Eco-evolutionary Red Queen dynamics regulate biodiversity in a metabolite-driven microbial system.Scientific reports · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In antagonistic symbioses, such as host-parasite interactions, one population's success is the other's loss. In mutualistic symbioses, such as division of labor, both parties can gain, but they might have different preferences over the possible mutualistic arrangements. The rates of evolution of the two populations in a symbiosis are important determinants of which population will be more successful: Faster evolution is thought to be favored in antagonistic symbioses (the "Red Queen effect"), but disfavored in certain mutualistic symbioses (the "Red King effect"). However, it remains unclear which biological parameters drive these effects. Here, we analyze the effects of the various determinants of evolutionary rate: generation time, mutation rate, population size, and the intensity of natural selection. Our main results hold for the case where mutation is infrequent. Slower evolution causes a long-term advantage in an important class of mutualistic interactions. Surprisingly, less intense selection is the strongest driver of this Red King effect, whereas relative mutation rates and generation times have little effect. In antagonistic interactions, faster evolution by any means is beneficial. Our results provide insight into the demographic evolution of symbionts.
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.