ArticleEcology and evolution2021
More than just noise: Chance, mating success, and sexual selection.
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- A male-biased sex ratio increases the opportunity for precopulatory sexual selection but does not change the Bateman gradient.Evolution letters · 2025Article
- A matter of time: Bateman's principles and mating success as count and duration across social strata in contemporary Finland.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2023Article
- Disentangling the causes of temporal variation in the opportunity for sexual selection.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Importance of interindividual interactions in eco-evolutionary population dynamics: The rise of demo-genetic agent-based models.Evolutionary applications · 2022Article
- Resource acquisition and pre-copulatory sexual selection.Ecology and evolution · 2022Article
- Cascading effects of pre-adult survival on sexual selection.Royal Society open science · 2022Article
- More than just noise: Chance, mating success, and sexual selection.Ecology and evolution · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chance plays a critical but underappreciated role in determining mating success. In many cases, we tend to think of chance as background noise that can be ignored in studies of mating dynamics. When the influence of chance is consistent across contexts, chance can be thought of as background noise; in other cases, however, the impact of chance on mating success can influence our understanding of how mates are acquired and how sexual selection operates. In particular, when the importance of chance covaries with biological or ecological factors in a systematic manner-that is, when chance becomes consistently more or less important under certain conditions-then chance is important to consider if we want to fully understand the operation of mate acquisition and sexual selection. Here, we present a model that explores how chance covaries with factors such as sex ratio, adult population size, and mating regime in determining variation in mating success. We find that in some cases, chance covaries with adult population size and the operational sex ratio to create variation in mating success. We discuss how chance can influence our more general understanding of the operation of mating dynamics and sexual selection.
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.