ArticleGenetics2025
The relationship between sexual dimorphism and intersex correlation: do models support intuition?
Article in Genetics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
The evolution of sexual dimorphism (SD) (the difference in average trait values between females and males) is often thought to be constrained by shared genetic architecture between the sexes. Indeed, it is commonly expected that SD should negatively correlate with the intersex correlation (the genetic correlation between effects of segregating variants in females and males, rfm), either because (1) traits with ancestrally low rfm are less constrained in their ability to respond to sex-specific selection and thus evolve to be more dimorphic, or because (2) sex-specific selection, driving sexual dimorphism evolution, also acts to reduce rfm. Despite the intuitive appeal and prominence of these ideas, their generality and the conditions in which they hold remain unclear. Here, we develop models incorporating sex-specific stabilizing selection, mutation, and genetic drift to examine the relationship between rfm and SD. We show that the two commonly-discussed mechanisms with the potential to generate a negative correlation between SD and rfm could just as easily generate a positive association, since the standard line of reasoning hinges on a hidden assumption that sex-specific adaptation more frequently favors increased dimorphism than reduced dimorphism. Our results provide, to our knowledge, the first mechanistic framework for understanding the conditions under which a correlation between rfm and SD may arise and offer a compelling explanation for inconsistent empirical evidence. We also make the intriguing observation that-even when selection between the two sexes is identical-drift generates nonzero SD. We quantify this effect and discuss its significance.
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.