Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42715319›Full record

ArticleScience advances2026

Genomic signatures of adaptation across a landscape of crickets following the introduction of a parasitoid fly.

Jack G Rayner, Leeban H Yusuf, Renjie Zhang, Shangzhe Zhang, Oscar E Gaggiotti, Nathan W Bailey

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Science advances, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Jack G RaynerCentre for Biological Diversity, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9259-9046
Leeban H YusufCentre for Biological Diversity, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, UK.
Renjie ZhangCentre for Biological Diversity, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, UK.ORCID 0009-0002-7269-7735
Shangzhe ZhangCentre for Biological Diversity, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2064-4287
Oscar E GaggiottiCentre for Biological Diversity, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1827-1493
Nathan W BaileyCentre for Biological Diversity, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3531-7756

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Novel species interactions provide an opportunity to assess the earliest stages of genetic adaptation. We combined population genomics and field selection surveys to explore the genomic and geographic landscape of adaptation in small, fragmented Hawaiian cricket populations, which are parasitized by larvae of an introduced fly that targets singing males. Multiple protective male-silencing cricket morphs have recently spread under this novel selection pressure, despite song's important roles in mate attraction. We find evidence of sharp declines in cricket effective population sizes following the fly's introduction and identify regions under spatially varying selection mediated by infestation risk, which are linked to an adaptive morph and other genes implicating in resisting infestation. Despite repeated bottlenecks, genetic variation is dominated by structural variant polymorphisms seemingly maintained under balancing selection. Our study illustrates pervasive consequences of abrupt changes in selection on small populations. Fly-mediated selection remains strong despite the spread of adaptive male-silencing phenotypes, which also reduce male fitness in the context of mate attraction.

Indexed as

Adaptation, PhysiologicalDipteraGenomicsGryllidaeAnimalsGenetic VariationMaleSelection, Genetic

Identifiers

PMID42715319
PMCPMC13557055

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.