Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29423654›Full record

ArticleDevelopment genes and evolution2018

The evolution of relative trait size and shape: insights from the genitalia of dung beetles.

Harald F Parzer, P David Polly, Armin P Moczek

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Development genes and evolution, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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.

Harald F ParzerDepartment of Biology, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA. hparzer@fdu.edu.
P David PollyDepartment of Biology, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA.
Armin P MoczekDepartment of Biology, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA.

Funding

National Science Foundation 0445661National Science Foundation 0718522
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Insects show relatively little genital variation within species compared to extraordinary and often rapid diversification among species. It has been suggested that selection for reproductive isolation through differences in genital shape might explain this phenomenon. This hypothesis predicts that populations diverge faster in genital shape than in genital size. We tested this prediction in males from 10 dung beetle species with known phylogenetic relationships from the genus Onthophagus (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae), including four species for which we were able to sample multiple populations. Specifically, we compared intra- and interspecific differentiation in shape and relative sizes of genitalia and calculated their respective evolutionary rates. We compared these rates to two similarly sized non-genital traits, the head and the fore-tibia. We found significant intraspecific variation in genital shape in all four species for which multiple populations were sampled, but for three of them we also identified significant relative size variation. We also found that genital shape evolved at higher rates than relative genital size. Genital shape evolved faster than head shape, but not fore-tibia shape. However, shapes of all measured structures evolved faster than their relative size. We discuss the functional constraints that may bias the developmental evolution of relative size and shape of genitalia and other morphological traits.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionGenetic VariationAnimalsBody SizeColeopteraGenitaliaMalePhenotypePhylogenyQuantitative Trait, HeritableReproductionEvolutionary ratesGenitaliaMorphological evolutionOnthophagusShapeSize

Identifiers

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.