Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30991912›Full record

ArticleBiology letters2019

Facultative parasites as evolutionary stepping-stones towards parasitic lifestyles.

Lien T Luong, Kimberley J Mathot

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biology letters, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Theoretical Study of Sphingomyelinases fromPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. A roadmap towards predicting species interaction networks (across space and time).Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021
    Review
  8. Article
  9. 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.

Lien T Luong1 Department of Biological Sciences, University of Alberta , Edmonton, Alberta, Canada T6G 2E9.
Kimberley J Mathot1 Department of Biological Sciences, University of Alberta , Edmonton, Alberta, Canada T6G 2E9.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Parasites and parasitic lifestyles have evolved from free-living organisms multiple times. How such a key evolutionary transition occurred remains puzzling. Facultative parasites represent potential transitional states between free-living and fully parasitic lifestyles because they can be either free-living or parasitic depending on environmental conditions. We suggest that facultative parasites with phenotypically plastic life-history strategies may serve as evolutionary stepping-stones towards obligate parasitism. Pre-adaptations provide a starting point for the transition towards opportunistic or facultative parasitism, but what evolutionary mechanism underlies the transition from facultative to obligate parasitism? In this Opinion Piece, we outline how facultative parasites could evolve towards obligate parasites via genetic assimilation, either alone or in combination with the Baldwin effect. We further describe the key predictions stemming from each of these evolutionary pathways. The importance of genetic assimilation in evolution has been hotly debated. Studies on facultative parasites may not only provide key insights regarding the evolution of parasitism, but also provide ideal systems in which to test evolutionary theory on genetic accommodation.

Indexed as

ParasitesAnimalsBiological EvolutionHost-Parasite InteractionsLife StyleSymbiosisBaldwin effectevolution of parasitismgenetic accommodationgenetic assimilationopportunistic pathogensphenotypic plasticity

Identifiers

PMID30991912
PMCPMC6501370

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.