Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38802126›Full record

ReviewIntegrative and comparative biology2024

Evolution of Litter Size: Proximate and Ultimate Mechanisms.

Kathryn Wilsterman, Anna Isabel Bautista, Chloe E Butler, Makenna Y Juergens, Ashley M Larson

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Integrative and comparative biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Kathryn WilstermanDepartment of Biology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, 80521, USA.
Anna Isabel BautistaDepartment of Biology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, 80521, USA.
Chloe E ButlerDepartment of Biology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, 80521, USA.
Makenna Y JuergensDepartment of Biology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, 80521, USA.
Ashley M LarsonDepartment of Biology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, 80521, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Relative reproductive success and failure are the ultimate determinants of Darwinian fitness. As such, reproductive traits and variations therein have an immediate and considerable impact on the evolutionary trajectory of lineages. Historically, significant attention has been paid to the ecological and evolutionary processes (ultimate factors) that shape the diversity and canalization of reproductive traits within groups to better our understanding of organismal diversity and population or species resilience. In contrast, the physiological systems that mediate variation within and among species (i.e., the proximate factors) in reproductive traits remain a significant black box. To date, there is comparatively little information about how proximate mechanisms constrain or promote evolutionary potential in reproductive traits. In this mini-review, we focus on litter size in Eutherian mammals as a trait with relatively well-defined diversity (litter sizes are well-described both within and across species) and for which some genetic determinants have been identified. We discuss both the ultimate and potential proximate determinants of litter size with special attention to the breadth of physiological traits that may act as "toggle" switches for evolution of litter size. We close with a brief discussion of the role that physiological plasticity may play in the evolution of litter size and lay out several forward-looking areas for future research.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionLitter SizeAnimalsFemaleMammals

Identifiers

PMID38802126
PMCPMC11659681

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.