ArticleJournal of evolutionary biology2022
Evolution of static allometry and constraint on evolutionary allometry in a fossil stickleback.
Article in Journal of evolutionary biology, 2022. 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.
- The Complex Interplay between Evolutionary Flexibility and Diversification in a Family of Spiders.Systematic biology · 2026Article
- Temporal trends in allometry of shell calcification in northeastern Pacific venerid bivalves: implications for predicting responses to climate change.Biology letters · 2025Article
- Inferring the evolution of reproductive isolation in a lineage of fossil threespine stickleback,Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2024Article
- Miocene phytolith and diatom dataset from 10.3Myo diatomite formation, Fernley, Nevada, USA.Data in brief · 2023Article
- Changing allometric relationships among fossil and Recent populations in two colonial species.Evolution; international journal of organic evolution · 2022Article
- Evolutionary allometry and ecological correlates of fang length evolution in vipers.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2022Article
- Evolution of static allometry and constraint on evolutionary allometry in a fossil stickleback.Journal of evolutionary biology · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Allometric scaling describes the relationship of trait size to body size within and among taxa. The slope of the population-level regression of trait size against body size (i.e. static allometry) is typically invariant among closely related populations and species. Such invariance is commonly interpreted to reflect a combination of developmental and selective constraints that delimit a phenotypic space into which evolution could proceed most easily. Thus, understanding how allometric relationships do eventually evolve is important to understanding phenotypic diversification. In a lineage of fossil Threespine Stickleback (Gasterosteus doryssus), we investigated the evolvability of static allometric slopes for nine traits (five armour and four non-armour) that evolved significant trait differences across 10 samples over 8500 years. The armour traits showed weak static allometric relationships and a mismatch between those slopes and observed evolution. This suggests that observed evolution in these traits was not constrained by relationships with body size, perhaps because prior, repeated adaptation to freshwater habitats by Threespine Stickleback had generated strong selection to break constraint. In contrast, for non-armour traits, we found stronger allometric relationships. Those allometric slopes did evolve on short time scales. However, those changes were small and fluctuating and the slopes remained strong predictors of the evolutionary trajectory of trait means over time (i.e. evolutionary allometry), supporting the hypothesis of allometry as constraint.
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.