ArticleBMC ecology and evolution2025
Natural and sexual selection and functional roles influence colouration but not the amount of variation in butterfly wing colour patterns.
Article in BMC ecology and evolution, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTrait variation is shaped by functional roles of traits and the strength and direction of selection acting on the traits. We hypothesized that in butterflies, sexually selected colouration is more variable owing to condition-dependent nature and directional selection on sexual ornaments, whereas naturally selected colouration may be less variable because of stabilising selection. We measured reflectance spectra, and extracted colour parameters, to compare the amount of variation in sexually versus naturally selected colour patches across wing surfaces and sexes of 20 butterfly species across 4 families (Nymphalidae, Papilionidae, Pieridae, Lycaenidae).
resultsWe found that: (a) males had more conspicuous, i.e., brighter and more saturated colour patches compared with females (as expected of sexually selected traits but not necessarily of naturally selected traits), and (b) dorsal surfaces in both sexes had more conspicuous sexual ornaments as well as protective (aposematic/mimetic) colour patches on darker wing backgrounds, compared with ventral surfaces. However, colour patches did not differ in the amount of variation either in selection (ecological/sexual functions), sex or wing surface-specific manner.
conclusionsThese findings show that functional roles and selection influence colour parameters but not the amount of variation in butterfly wing colour patterns.
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.