↓ Skip to main content

THE EVOLUTIONARY STABILITY OF CROSS‐SEX, CROSS‐TRAIT GENETIC COVARIANCES

Overview of attention for article published in Evolution, April 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
39 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
106 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
THE EVOLUTIONARY STABILITY OF CROSS‐SEX, CROSS‐TRAIT GENETIC COVARIANCES
Published in
Evolution, April 2014
DOI 10.1111/evo.12398
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas P. Gosden, Stephen F. Chenoweth

Abstract

Although knowledge of the selective agents behind the evolution of sexual dimorphism has advanced considerably in recent years, we still lack a clear understanding of the evolutionary durability of cross-sex genetic covariances that often constrain its evolution. We tested the relative stability of cross-sex genetic covariances for a suite of homologous contact pheromones of the fruit fly Drosophila serrata, along a latitudinal gradient where these traits have diverged in mean. Using a Bayesian framework, which allowed us to account for uncertainty in all parameter estimates, we compared divergence in the total amount and orientation of genetic variance across populations, finding divergence in orientation but not total variance. We then statistically compared orientation divergence of within-sex (G) to cross-sex (B) covariance matrices. In line with a previous theoretical prediction, we find that the cross-sex covariance matrix, B, is more variable than either within-sex G matrix. Decomposition of B matrices into their symmetrical and nonsymmetrical components revealed that instability is linked to the degree of asymmetry. We also find that the degree of asymmetry correlates with latitude suggesting a role for spatially varying natural selection in shaping genetic constraints on the evolution of sexual dimorphism.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Switzerland 2 2%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 101 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 26%
Student > Bachelor 19 18%
Researcher 17 16%
Student > Master 10 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Other 17 16%
Unknown 8 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 68 64%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 9%
Environmental Science 6 6%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Linguistics 1 <1%
Other 5 5%
Unknown 13 12%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 March 2014.
All research outputs
#16,580,157
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Evolution
#4,871
of 5,878 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#127,707
of 224,351 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Evolution
#44
of 67 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,878 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.9. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 224,351 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 67 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.