These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

181 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11287953)

  • 21. Mate choice evolution, dominance effects, and the maintenance of genetic variation.
    Lehmann L; Keller LF; Kokko H
    J Theor Biol; 2007 Jan; 244(2):282-95. PubMed ID: 16979189
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Female soldier beetles display a flexible preference for selectively favored male phenotypes.
    McLain DK
    Evolution; 2005 May; 59(5):1085-95. PubMed ID: 16136806
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Escalation, retreat, and female indifference as alternative outcomes of sexually antagonistic coevolution.
    Rowe L; Cameron E; Day T
    Am Nat; 2005 May; 165 Suppl 5():S5-18. PubMed ID: 15795862
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Sexually antagonistic genetic variation for fitness in red deer.
    Foerster K; Coulson T; Sheldon BC; Pemberton JM; Clutton-Brock TH; Kruuk LE
    Nature; 2007 Jun; 447(7148):1107-10. PubMed ID: 17597758
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Testing for direct and indirect effects of mate choice by manipulating female choosiness.
    Maklakov AA; Arnqvist G
    Curr Biol; 2009 Dec; 19(22):1903-6. PubMed ID: 19853448
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Mate choice for nonadditive genetic benefits and the maintenance of genetic diversity in song sparrows.
    Neff BD; Pitcher TE
    J Evol Biol; 2009 Feb; 22(2):424-9. PubMed ID: 19032502
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Genotype x environment interaction for male attractiveness in an acoustic moth: evidence for plasticity and canalization.
    Danielson-François AM; Kelly JK; Greenfield MD
    J Evol Biol; 2006 Mar; 19(2):532-42. PubMed ID: 16599929
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Genetic similarity and quality interact in mate choice decisions by female mice.
    Roberts SC; Gosling LM
    Nat Genet; 2003 Sep; 35(1):103-6. PubMed ID: 12937417
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. The genetic architecture of a niche: variation and covariation in host use traits in the Colorado potato beetle.
    Forister ML; Ehmer AG; Futuyma DJ
    J Evol Biol; 2007 May; 20(3):985-96. PubMed ID: 17465909
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Genic capture and resolving the lek paradox.
    Tomkins JL; Radwan J; Kotiaho JS; Tregenza T
    Trends Ecol Evol; 2004 Jun; 19(6):323-8. PubMed ID: 16701278
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. The effects of reproduction on courtship, fertility and longevity within and between alternative male mating tactics of the horned beetle, Onthophagus binodis.
    Simmons LW; Kotiaho JS
    J Evol Biol; 2007 Mar; 20(2):488-95. PubMed ID: 17305814
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Longevity cost of reproduction for males but no longevity cost of mating or courtship for females in the male-dimorphic dung beetle Onthophagus binodis.
    Kotiaho JS; Simmons LW
    J Insect Physiol; 2003 Sep; 49(9):817-22. PubMed ID: 16256683
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Good genes, genetic compatibility and the evolution of polyandry: use of the diallel cross to address competing hypotheses.
    Ivy TM
    J Evol Biol; 2007 Mar; 20(2):479-87. PubMed ID: 17305813
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Paternal genetic effects on offspring fitness are context dependent within the extrapair mating system of a socially monogamous passerine.
    Schmoll T; Dietrich V; Winkel W; Epplen JT; Schurr F; Lubjuhn T
    Evolution; 2005 Mar; 59(3):645-57. PubMed ID: 15856706
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Population genetic models of male and mutual mate choice.
    Servedio MR; Lande R
    Evolution; 2006 Apr; 60(4):674-85. PubMed ID: 16739450
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Nonrandom mating preserves intrasexual polymorphism and stops population differentiation in sexual conflict.
    Hardling R; Bergsten J
    Am Nat; 2006 Mar; 167(3):401-9. PubMed ID: 16673348
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Genetic constraints and sexual dimorphism in immune defense.
    Rolff J; Armitage SA; Coltman DW
    Evolution; 2005 Aug; 59(8):1844-50. PubMed ID: 16329251
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Lekking without a paradox in the buff-breasted sandpiper.
    Lanctot RB; Scribner KT; Lanctot RB; Weatherhead PJ; Kempenaers B
    Am Nat; 1997 Jun; 149(6):1051-70. PubMed ID: 18811263
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. The evolution of harm--effect of sexual conflicts and population size.
    Gay L; Hosken DJ; Eady P; Vasudev R; Tregenza T
    Evolution; 2011 Mar; 65(3):725-37. PubMed ID: 21050188
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Microsatellite DNA analysis shows that greater sage grouse leks are not kin groups.
    Gibson RM; Pires D; Delaney KS; Wayne RK
    Mol Ecol; 2005 Dec; 14(14):4453-9. PubMed ID: 16313605
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.