ArticleEvolution; international journal of organic evolution2020
Sexually selected male weapon is associated with lower inbreeding load but higher sex load in the bulb mite.
Article in Evolution; international journal of organic evolution, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Genetic rescue increases long-term fitness despite elevating putative genetic load in a male-dimorphic mite.Nature ecology & evolution · 2026Article
- Experimental Evolution Under Biased Sex Ratios: Phenotypic and Genomic Responses in the Bulb Mite, Rhizoglyphus robini.Genome biology and evolution · 2026Article
- Life History Consequences of the Prevalence of Aggressive Males Carrying Costly Weapons.Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- Sexual selection, genomic evolution and population fitness inProceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
- Developmental Plasticity and the Evolutionary Rescue of a Colonizing Mite.Evolution & development · 2025Article
- Transcriptomics of differences in thermal plasticity associated with selection for an exaggerated male sexual trait.Heredity · 2024Article
- Small-scale genetic structure of populations of the bulb mite Rhizoglyphus robini.Experimental & applied acarology · 2023Article
- Genomic evidence that a sexually selected trait captures genome-wide variation and facilitates the purging of genetic load.Nature ecology & evolution · 2022Article
- Sexual conflict in a changing environment.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Elaborate sexually selected ornaments and armaments are costly but increase the reproductive success of their bearers (usually males). It has been postulated that high-quality males can invest disproportionately more in such traits, making those traits honest signals of genetic quality. However, genes associated with such traits may have sexually antagonistic effects on fitness. Here, using a bulb mite Rhizoglyphus robini, a species in which a distinct dimorphism exists between males in the expression of a sexually selected weapon, we compare inbreeding and gender load between lines derived from armed fighters and unarmed scramblers. After four generations of sib-mating, inbreeding depression for female fitness was significantly lower in fighter-derived lines compared to scrambler-derived lines, suggesting that fighter males had significantly higher genetic quality. However, outbred females from fighter-derived lines had significantly lower fitness compared to outbred females from scrambler-derived lines, demonstrating significant gender load associated with the presence of a sexually selected male weapon. Our results imply that under outbreeding, genetic benefits of mating with bearers of elaborate sexually selected traits might be swamped by the costs of decreased fitness of female progeny due to sexually antagonistic effects.
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.