ArticleScientific reports2017
Proximity of signallers can maintain sexual signal variation under stabilizing selection.
Article in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ecological immunology: do sexual attraction and immunity trade-off through a desaturase?Insect science · 2025Article
- Diet-derived male sex pheromone compounds affect female choice in a noctuid moth.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Evolution of the Sex Pheromone Communication System inInsects · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
How sexual communication systems can evolve under stabilizing selection is still a paradox in evolutionary biology. In moths, females emit a species-specific sex pheromone, consisting of a blend of biochemically related components, to which males are attracted. Although males appear to exert strong stabilizing selection on female pheromone, these blends seem to have evolved rapidly, as evidenced by ~120,000 moth species. Here we propose and test a "proximity model" wherein two females that vary in their relative attractiveness to males, can both benefit from calling in close proximity to each other. In a field study, we show that (1) artificially selected unattractive females can achieve mating rates comparable to attractive females if they signal in close proximity to attractive females, and (2) attractive females benefit from higher mating rates when signalling in close proximity to unattractive females. We propose that frequency-dependent behavioural and spatial interactions can sustain signal variation within populations even when these signals are under stabilizing selection.
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.