Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33866808›Full record

ArticlePhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2021

Evolution of epigenetic transmission when selection acts on fecundity versus viability.

Bram Kuijper, Rufus A Johnstone

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 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
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. How does epigenetics influence the course of evolution?Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021
    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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Bram KuijperCentre for Ecology and Conservation, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Penryn TR10 9FE, UK.
Rufus A JohnstoneBehaviour and Evolution Group, Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EJ, UK.
University of Cambridge · GBUniversity of Exeter · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Existing theory on the evolution of parental effects and the inheritance of non-genetic factors has mostly focused on the role of environmental change. By contrast, how differences in population demography and life history affect parental effects is poorly understood. To fill this gap, we develop an analytical model to explore how parental effects evolve when selection acts on fecundity versus viability in spatio-temporally fluctuating environments. We find that regimes of viability selection, but not fecundity selection, are most likely to favour parental effects. In the case of viability selection, locally adapted phenotypes have a higher survival than maladapted phenotypes and hence become enriched in the local environment. Hence, simply by being alive, a parental phenotype becomes correlated to its environment (and hence informative to offspring) during its lifetime, favouring the evolution of parental effects. By contrast, in regimes of fecundity selection, correlations between phenotype and environment develop more slowly: this is because locally adapted and maladapted parents survive at equal rates (no survival selection), so that parental phenotypes, by themselves, are uninformative about the local environment. However, because locally adapted parents are more fecund, they contribute more offspring to the local patch than maladapted parents. In case these offspring are also likely to inherit the adapted parents' phenotypes (requiring pre-existing inheritance), locally adapted offspring become enriched in the local environment, resulting in a correlation between phenotype and environment, but only in the offspring's generation. Because of this slower build-up of a correlation between phenotype and environment essential to parental effects, fecundity selection is more sensitive to any distortions owing to environmental change than viability selection. Hence, we conclude that viability selection is most conducive to the evolution of parental effects. This article is part of the theme issue 'How does epigenetics influence the course of evolution?'

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionEpigenesis, GeneticSelection, GeneticFertilityLongevityModels, Geneticenvironmental changeinformationnon-genetic inheritanceparental effectsphenotypic plasticitytransgenerational effects

Identifiers

PMID33866808
PMCPMC8059634
OpenAlexW3122436679

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.