Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29375771›Full record

ArticleEcology and evolution2018

General environmental heterogeneity as the explanation of sexuality? Comparative study shows that ancient asexual taxa are associated with both biotically and abiotically homogeneous environments.

Jan Toman, Jaroslav Flegr

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecology and evolution, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors.

Jan TomanFaculty of Science Laboratory of Evolutionary Biology Department of Philosophy and History of Sciences Charles University Prague Czech Republic.ORCID 0000-0002-0776-2070
Jaroslav FlegrFaculty of Science Laboratory of Evolutionary Biology Department of Philosophy and History of Sciences Charles University Prague Czech Republic.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ecological theories of sexual reproduction assume that sexuality is advantageous in certain conditions, for example, in biotically or abiotically more heterogeneous environments. Such theories thus could be tested by comparative studies. However, the published results of these studies are rather unconvincing. Here, we present the results of a new comparative study based exclusively on the ancient asexual clades. The association with biotically or abiotically homogeneous environments in these asexual clades was compared with the same association in their sister, or closely related, sexual clades. Using the conservative definition of ancient asexuals (i.e., age >1 million years), we found eight pairs of taxa of sexual and asexual species, six differing in the heterogeneity of their inhabited environment on the basis of available data. The difference between the environmental type associated with the sexual and asexual species was then compared in an exact binomial test. The results showed that the majority of ancient asexual clades tend to be associated with biotically, abiotically, or both biotically and abiotically more homogeneous environments than their sexual controls. In the exploratory part of the study, we found that the ancient asexuals often have durable resting stages, enabling life in subjectively homogeneous environments, live in the absence of intense biotic interactions, and are very often sedentary, inhabiting benthos, and soil. The consequences of these findings for the ecological theories of sexual reproduction are discussed.

Indexed as

ancient asexualsasexual reproductionFrozen evolution theoryhabitat heterogeneitysexual reproduction

Identifiers

PMID29375771
PMCPMC5773305

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.