Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33586211›Full record

ReviewMolecular ecology2021

An inconvenient tooth: Evaluating female choice in multiple paternity using an evolutionarily and ecologically important vertebrate clade.

Kady Lyons, Dovi Kacev, Christopher G Mull

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Molecular ecology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. 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

3 authors.

Kady LyonsGeorgia Aquarium, Atlanta, GA, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2001-4939
Dovi KacevScripps Institution of Oceanography, San Diego, CA, USA.
Christopher G MullDalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-1710-8256

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Understanding mating systems is a pillar of behavioural ecology, placing the complex interactions between females and males into a reproductive context. The field of multiple paternity, the phenomenon whereby many sires contribute to an individual litter, has traditionally viewed females as passive players in a male-male competitive framework. With the emergence of feminist perspectives in ecological fields, novel alternative mechanisms and evolutionary theories across invertebrate and vertebrate taxa recognize females are active stakeholders in the reproductive process. Despite their evolutionary significance, ecological diversity and myriad reproductive modes, elasmobranch (sharks, skates and rays) research lags behind other fields regarding complex biological processes, such as multiple paternity which is often ascribed to convenience polyandry. Here, we layout hypotheses and resynthesize multiple paternity literature from a female and life history perspective to highlight how alternative mechanisms influence the predominance of multiple paternity across elasmobranchs. We draw upon parallels in other invertebrate and vertebrate taxa to demonstrate how female elasmobranchs can influence multiple paternity outcomes that benefit their reproductive success. Our article challenges dogma that has resulted from years of dismissing the female perspective as important and provides a framework for future advancement using more holistic approaches to studying mating systems.

Indexed as

PaternitySharksAnimalsBiological EvolutionFemaleMaleReproductionSexual Behavior, Animalcryptic female choiceecological feminismintrasexual competitionlifetime reproductive outputmaternal investmentpolyandry

Identifiers

PMID33586211
PMCPMC8251896

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.