↓ Skip to main content

Are heritability and selection related to population size in nature? Meta‐analysis and conservation implications

Overview of attention for article published in Evolutionary Applications, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
30 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
61 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
159 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Are heritability and selection related to population size in nature? Meta‐analysis and conservation implications
Published in
Evolutionary Applications, April 2016
DOI 10.1111/eva.12375
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jacquelyn L. A. Wood, Matthew C. Yates, Dylan J. Fraser

Abstract

It is widely thought that small populations should have less additive genetic variance and respond less efficiently to natural selection than large populations. Across taxa, we meta-analytically quantified the relationship between adult census population size (N) and additive genetic variance (proxy: h (2)) and found no reduction in h (2) with decreasing N; surveyed populations ranged from four to one million individuals (1735 h (2) estimates, 146 populations, 83 species). In terms of adaptation, ecological conditions may systematically differ between populations of varying N; the magnitude of selection these populations experience may therefore also differ. We thus also meta-analytically tested whether selection changes with N and found little evidence for systematic differences in the strength, direction or form of selection with N across different trait types and taxa (7344 selection estimates, 172 populations, 80 species). Collectively, our results (i) indirectly suggest that genetic drift neither overwhelms selection more in small than in large natural populations, nor weakens adaptive potential/h (2) in small populations, and (ii) imply that natural populations of varying sizes experience a variety of environmental conditions, without consistently differing habitat quality at small N. However, we caution that the data are currently insufficient to determine whether some small populations may retain adaptive potential definitively. Further study is required into (i) selection and genetic variation in completely isolated populations of known N, under-represented taxonomic groups, and nongeneralist species, (ii) adaptive potential using multidimensional approaches and (iii) the nature of selective pressures for specific traits.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 30 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 159 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 3 2%
United States 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 153 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 37 23%
Researcher 30 19%
Student > Master 24 15%
Student > Bachelor 14 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 4%
Other 22 14%
Unknown 25 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 100 63%
Environmental Science 13 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 2%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 <1%
Other 4 3%
Unknown 28 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 46. 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 18 July 2020.
All research outputs
#593,185
of 18,248,093 outputs
Outputs from Evolutionary Applications
#71
of 1,227 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,335
of 273,450 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Evolutionary Applications
#4
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,248,093 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,227 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
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 273,450 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.