ReviewProceedings. Biological sciences2022
A sex skew in life-history research: the problem of missing males.
Review in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Age-Dependent Gut Microbiota Dynamics and Their Association with Male Life-History Traits in Drosophila melanogaster.Microbial ecology · 2025Article
- Fluctuating salinity during development impacts fish life histories.The Journal of animal ecology · 2025Article
- Positive covariation between current reproduction and subsequent performance in a raptor: Is the devil in the details?Ecology · 2025Article
- Predation affects the evolution of sex-specific longevity.Biology letters · 2024Article
- Male allocation to ejaculation and mating effort imposes different life history trade-offs.PLoS biology · 2024Article
- Correlates of early reproduction and apparent fitness consequences in male Soay sheep.Ecology and evolution · 2023Article
- Father absence and pubertal timing in Korean boys and girls.Evolution, medicine, and public health · 2023Article
- Despite COVID: showcasing new research in evolutionary biology from academic care-givers in the middle of a pandemic.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2022Article
- A sex skew in life-history research: the problem of missing males.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Life-history strategies are diverse. While understanding this diversity is a fundamental aim of evolutionary biology and biodemography, life-history data for some traits-in particular, age-dependent reproductive investment-are biased towards females. While other authors have highlighted this sex skew, the general scale of this bias has not been quantified and its impact on our understanding of evolutionary ecology has not been discussed. This review summarizes why the sexes can evolve different life-history strategies. The scale of the sex skew is then discussed and its magnitude compared between taxonomic groups, laboratory and field studies, and through time. We discuss the consequences of this sex skew for evolutionary and ecological research. In particular, this sex bias means that we cannot test some core evolutionary theory. Additionally, this skew could obscure or drive trends in data and hinder our ability to develop effective conservation strategies. We finally highlight some ways through which this skew could be addressed to help us better understand broad patterns in life-history strategies.
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.