Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29040605›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of heredity2018

Negative-Assortative Mating in the White-Throated Sparrow.

Philip W Hedrick, Elaina M Tuttle, Rusty A Gonser

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of heredity, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

3 authors.

Philip W HedrickSchool of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ.
Elaina M Tuttlethe Department of Biology and Center for Genomic Advocacy, Indiana State University, Terre Haute, IN.
Rusty A Gonserthe Department of Biology and Center for Genomic Advocacy, Indiana State University, Terre Haute, IN.

Funding

Behavioral Genomics of the White-throated SparrowR01GM084229 · NIGMS · INDIANA STATE UNIVERSITY · PI GONSER, RUSTY, TUTTLE, ELAINA M · 2009 to 2010
$630k
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM084229
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nonrandom mating based on phenotype has been observed in a number of organisms, but a very high proportion of these examples are of assortative mating. The strongest example of negative-assortative mating is for white-striped versus tan-striped crown in the white-throated sparrow, where about 98% of the observed pairings (mated pairs or social pairs) are between mates with different phenotypes and the correlation between mating types is -0.964. Although nonrandom mating has been explored theoretically for decades, these models have generally not focused on specific well-documented examples. Here we have developed a model to investigate the dynamics and equilibrium of this iconic example. The observed pattern of mating appears to be the result of 96% negative-assortative mating and a 17% advantage of W (white) male × T (tan) female matings compared to the reciprocal T male × W female matings. The equilibrium heterozygosity given these values is 0.500, very close to the 0.501 observed in our large sample of pairings, and this heterozygosity has been maintained for the 29 years from 1988 to 2016. In addition, the equilibrium frequency of 2m inversion determining the white-striped phenotype has been maintained at a frequency very close to its equilibrium frequency of 0.25. Overall, this model demonstrates how evolutionary genetic models can be used to understand negative-assortative mating.

Indexed as

AnimalsFemaleGenetics, PopulationHeterozygoteMaleMating Preference, AnimalModels, BiologicalNew YorkPhenotypeSparrows

Identifiers

PMID29040605
PMCPMC6307691

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.