Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31417613›Full record

ReviewEvolutionary applications2019

Mixed evidence for adaptation to environmental pollution.

Alessandra Loria, Melania E Cristescu, Andrew Gonzalez

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Evolutionary applications, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Anthropogenic Change and the Process of Speciation.Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in biology · 2023
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Life in fluctuating environments.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2020
    Review
  11. On biological evolution and environmental solutions.The Science of the total environment · 2020
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Causes of maladaptation.Evolutionary applications · 2019
    Review
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.

Alessandra LoriaDepartment of Biology McGill University Montreal Québec Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1834-6205
Melania E CristescuDepartment of Biology McGill University Montreal Québec Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0854-4040
Andrew GonzalezDepartment of Biology McGill University Montreal Québec Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6075-8081

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Adaptation to pollution has been studied since the first observations of heavy metal tolerance in plants decades ago. To document micro-evolutionary responses to pollution, researchers have used phenotypic, molecular genetics, and demographic approaches. We reviewed 258 articles and evaluated the evidence for adaptive responses following exposure to a wide range of pollutants, across multiple taxonomic groups. We also conducted a meta-analysis to calculate the magnitude of phenotypic change in invertebrates in response to metal pollution. The majority of studies that reported differences in responses to pollution were focused on phenotypic responses at the individual level. Most of the studies that used demographic assays in their investigations found that negative effects induced by pollution often worsened over multiple generations. Our meta-analysis did not reveal a significant relationship between metal pollution intensity and changes in the traits studied, and this was probably due to differences in coping responses among different species, the broad array of abiotic and biotic factors, and the weak statistical power of the analysis. We found it difficult to make broad statements about how likely or how common adaptation is in the presence of environmental contamination. Ecological and evolutionary responses to contamination are complex, and difficult to interpret in the context of taxonomic, and methodological biases, and the inconsistent set of approaches that have been used to study adaptation to pollution in the laboratory and in the field. This review emphasizes the need for: (a) long-term monitoring programs on exposed populations that link demography to phenotypic, genetic, and selection assays; (b) the use of standardized protocols across studies especially for similar taxa. Approaches that combine field and laboratory studies offer the greatest opportunity to reveal the complex eco-evolutionary feedback that can occur under selection imposed by pollution.

Indexed as

genetic variationmeta‐analysisphenotypic responsepollutionpopulation persistenceresistanceselection

Identifiers

PMID31417613
PMCPMC6691217

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.