ArticleThe Journal of heredity2022
Maternal-Offspring Interactions: Reciprocally Coevolving Social Environments.
Article in The Journal of heredity, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Indirect Genetic Effects: A Cross-disciplinary Perspective on Empirical Studies.The Journal of heredity · 2022Article
- When is Offspring Viability Fitness a Measure of Paternal Fitness and When is it not?The Journal of heredity · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Maternal-zygotic co-evolution is one of the most common examples of indirect genetic effects. I investigate how maternal-zygotic gene interactions affect rates of evolution and adaptation. Using comparably parameterized population genetic models, I compare evolution to an abiotic environment with genotype-by-environment interaction (G × E) to evolution to a maternal environment with offspring genotype-by-maternal environment interaction (G × Gmaternal). There are strong parallels between the 2 models in the components of fitness variance but they differ in their rates of evolution measured in terms of ∆p, gene frequency change, or of ∆W, change in mean fitness. The Price Equation is used to partition ∆W into 2 components, one owing to the genetic variance in fitness by natural selection and a second owing to change in environment. Adaptive evolution is faster in the 2-locus model with G × Gmaternal with free recombination, than it is in the 1-locus model with G × E, because in the former the maternal genetic environment coevolves with the zygotic phenotype adapting to it. I discuss the relevance of these findings for the evolution of genes with indirect genetic 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.