ArticleEvolution; international journal of organic evolution2022
Secondary contact rather than coexistence-Erebia butterflies in the Alps.
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 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 microbial view on secondary contact between two Alpine butterflies.BMC ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- Co-Occurring Sister Taxa of Mountain Butterflies Exhibit Distinct Cuticular Hydrocarbon Profiles.Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- Holocentric repeat landscapes: From micro-evolutionary patterns to macro-evolutionary associations with karyotype evolution.Molecular ecology · 2024Article
- Reproductive character displacement: insights from genital morphometrics in damselfly hybrid zones.Heredity · 2024Article
- A macroevolutionary role for chromosomal fusion and fission inScience advances · 2024Article
- Asynchronous life cycles contribute to reproductive isolation between two Alpine butterflies.Evolution letters · 2023Article
- Genomic evidence for three distinct species in theConservation genetics (Print) · 2023Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Secondary contact zones are ideal systems to study the processes that govern the evolution of reproductive barriers, especially at advanced stages of the speciation process. An increase in reproductive isolation resulting from selection against maladaptive hybrids is thought to contribute to reproductive barrier buildup in secondary contact zones. Although such processes have been invoked for many systems, it remains unclear to which extent they influence contact zone dynamics in nature. Here, we study a very narrow contact zone between the butterfly species Erebia cassioides and Erebia tyndarus in the Swiss Alps. We quantified phenotypic traits related to wing shape and reproduction as well as ecology to compare the degree of intra- and interspecific differentiation. Even though only very few first-generation hybrids occur, we find no strong indications for current reinforcing selection, suggesting that if reinforcement occurred in our system, it likely operated in the past. Additionally, we show that both species differ less in their ecological niche at the contact zone than elsewhere, which could explain why coexistence between these butterflies may currently not be possible.
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.