Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28855362›Full record

ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2017

A father effect explains sex-ratio bias.

Aurelio F Malo, Felipe Martinez-Pastor, Francisco Garcia-Gonzalez, Julián Garde, Jonathan D Ballou, Robert C Lacy

Open access · bronzeAbstract 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 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
8.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. A father effect explains sex-ratio bias.Proceedings. 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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Aurelio F MaloDepartment of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3PS, UK aurelio.malo@zoo.ox.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0846-2096
Felipe Martinez-PastorSaBio IREC (CSIC-UCLM-JCCM), Campus Universitario s. n. 02071, Albacete, Spain.
Francisco Garcia-GonzalezEstacion Biológica de Doñana, CSIC, Sevilla, Spain.
Julián GardeSaBio IREC (CSIC-UCLM-JCCM), Campus Universitario s. n. 02071, Albacete, Spain.
Jonathan D BallouSmithsonian Conservation Biology Institute, Washington, DC, USA.
Robert C LacyChicago Zoological Society, Brookfield, IL, USA.
Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute · USChicago Zoological Society · USThe University of Western Australia · AUUniversidad de León · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sex ratio allocation has important fitness consequences, and theory predicts that parents should adjust offspring sex ratio in cases where the fitness returns of producing male and female offspring vary. The ability of fathers to bias offspring sex ratios has traditionally been dismissed given the expectation of an equal proportion of X- and Y-chromosome-bearing sperm (CBS) in ejaculates due to segregation of sex chromosomes at meiosis. This expectation has been recently refuted. Here we used

Indexed as

Paternal InheritanceSex RatioAnimalsBiological EvolutionFemaleGenetic VariationMaleReproductionSpermatozoainbreedingmale effectssex allocationsperm cell nucleussperm nucleus sizeTrivers and Willard hypothesis

Identifiers

PMID28855362
PMCPMC5577485
OpenAlexW2750883094

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.