ArticleBMC ecology2018
Demographic consequences of reproductive interference in multi-species communities.
Article in BMC ecology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Caenorhabditis diversity on Pohnpei, Micronesia, provides evidence that the Elegans Supergroup has its roots in the Americas and diversified in the Pacific en route to Asia.Evolution; international journal of organic evolution · 2026Article
- Article
- Phylogenomic timetree-calibrated speciation clocks for Caenorhabditis nematodes reveal slow but disproportionate accumulation of post-zygotic reproductive isolation.PLoS genetics · 2025Article
- Reproductive Interference Alters Species Coexistence in Nematodes due to Asymmetric Sperm-Induced Harm.Ecology letters · 2025Article
- Niche differentiation, reproductive interference, and range expansion.Ecology letters · 2024Article
- Successful mating and hybridisation in two closely related flatworm species despite significant differences in reproductive morphology and behaviour.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Evolution of sex ratio through gene loss.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundReproductive interference can mediate interference competition between species through sexual interactions that reduce the fitness of one species by another. Theory shows that the positive frequency-dependent effects of such costly errors in mate recognition can dictate species coexistence or exclusion even with countervailing resource competition differences between species. While usually framed in terms of pre-mating or post-zygotic costs, reproductive interference manifests between individual Caenorhabditis nematodes from negative interspecies gametic interactions: sperm cells from interspecies matings can migrate ectopically to induce female sterility and premature death. The potential for reproductive interference to exert population level effects on Caenorhabditis trait evolution and community structure, however, remains unknown.
resultsHere we test whether a species that is superior in individual-level reproductive interference (C. nigoni) can exact negative demographic effects on competitor species that are superior in resource competition (C. briggsae and C. elegans). We observe coexistence over six generations and find evidence of demographic reproductive interference even under conditions unfavorable to its influence. C. briggsae and C. elegans show distinct patterns of reproductive interference in competitive interactions with C. nigoni.
conclusionsThese results affirm that individual level negative effects of reproductive interference mediated by gamete interactions can ramify to population demography, with the potential to influence patterns of species coexistence separately from the effects of direct resource competition.
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.