Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34605553›Full record

ArticleEvolution; international journal of organic evolution2022

Evolution of sociability by artificial selection

Andrew M Scott, Ian Dworkin, Reuven Dukas

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Evolution; international journal of organic evolution, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Digest: The evolution of social behavior and its effect on aggressiveness and reproduction.Evolution; international journal of organic evolution · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Andrew M ScottAnimal Behaviour Group, Department of Psychology, Neuroscience and Behaviour, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4K1, Canada.
Ian DworkinDepartment of Biology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4K1, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-2874-287X
Reuven DukasAnimal Behaviour Group, Department of Psychology, Neuroscience and Behaviour, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4K1, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-4533-8542

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There has been extensive research on the ecology and evolution of social life in animals that live in groups. Less attention, however, has been devoted to apparently solitary species, even though recent research indicates that they also possess complex social behaviors. To address this knowledge gap, we artificially selected on sociability, defined as the tendency to engage in nonaggressive activities with others, in fruit flies. Our goal was to quantify the factors that determine the level of sociability and the traits correlated with this feature. After 25 generations of selection, the high-sociability lineages showed sociability scores about 50% higher than did the low-sociability lineages. Experiments using the evolved lineages indicated that there were no differences in mating success between flies from the low and high lineages. Both males and females from the low lineages, however, were more aggressive than males and females from the high lineages. Finally, the evolved lineages maintained their sociability scores after 10 generations of relaxed selection, suggesting no costs to maintaining low and high sociability, at least under our settings. Sociability is a complex trait, which we currently assess through genomic work on the evolved lineages.

Indexed as

AggressionDrosophila melanogasterAnimalsFemaleMalePhenotypeReproductionSexual Behavior, AnimalSocial BehaviorAggressionartificial selectionDrosophila melanogastermate choicesociabilitysocial behavior

Identifiers

PMID34605553

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.