Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31795853›Full record

ArticleBiology letters2019

Spontaneous abortion as a response to reproductive conflict in the banded mongoose.

E Inzani, H H Marshall, F J Thompson, G Kalema-Zikusoka, M A Cant, E I K Vitikainen

Open access · greenAbstract 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 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. The social formation of fitness: lifetime consequences of prenatal nutrition and postnatal care in a wild mammal population.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Reproduction is driven by seasonal environmental variation in an equatorial mammal, the banded mongoose (Behavioral ecology : official journal of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology
    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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.

E InzaniCentre for Ecology and Conservation, University of Exeter, Penryn Campus, Penryn, UK.
H H MarshallCentre for Ecology and Conservation, University of Exeter, Penryn Campus, Penryn, UK.
F J ThompsonCentre for Ecology and Conservation, University of Exeter, Penryn Campus, Penryn, UK.
G Kalema-ZikusokaConservation Through Public Health, Entebbe, Uganda.
M A CantCentre for Ecology and Conservation, University of Exeter, Penryn Campus, Penryn, UK.
E I K VitikainenCentre for Ecology and Conservation, University of Exeter, Penryn Campus, Penryn, UK.
University of Exeter · GBNkumba University · UGUniversity of Helsinki · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

When breeding females compete for limited resources, the intensity of this reproductive conflict can determine whether the fitness benefits of current reproductive effort exceed the potential costs to survival and future fertility. In group-living species, reproductive competition can occur through post-natal competition among the offspring of co-breeding females. Spontaneous abortion could be a response to such competition, allowing females to curtail reproductive expenditure on offspring that are unlikely to survive and to conserve resources for future breeding opportunities. We tested this hypothesis using long-term data on banded mongooses,

Indexed as

Abortion, SpontaneousHerpestidaeAnimalsBreedingFemaleFertilityHumansPregnancyReproductionabortionbanded mongoosecooperative speciesfemale reproductive competitionreproductive suppression

Identifiers

PMID31795853
PMCPMC6936015
OpenAlexW2993401053

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.