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 *

310 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15795864)

  • 1. Experimental removal and elevation of sexual selection: does sexual selection generate manipulative males and resistant females?
    Crudgington HS; Beckerman AP; Brüstle L; Green K; Snook RR
    Am Nat; 2005 May; 165 Suppl 5():S72-87. PubMed ID: 15795864
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Female remating, sperm competition and sexual selection in Drosophila.
    Singh SR; Singh BN; Hoenigsberg HF
    Genet Mol Res; 2002 Sep; 1(3):178-215. PubMed ID: 14963827
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Experimental manipulation of sexual selection and the evolution of courtship song in Drosophila pseudoobscura.
    Snook RR; Robertson A; Crudgington HS; Ritchie MG
    Behav Genet; 2005 May; 35(3):245-55. PubMed ID: 15864440
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Increased opportunity for sexual conflict promotes harmful males with elevated courtship frequencies.
    Crudgington HS; Fellows S; Snook RR
    J Evol Biol; 2010 Feb; 23(2):440-6. PubMed ID: 20039999
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Sex ratio drive promotes sexual conflict and sexual coevolution in the fly Drosophila pseudoobscura.
    Price TA; Lewis Z; Smith DT; Hurst GD; Wedell N
    Evolution; 2010 May; 64(5):1504-9. PubMed ID: 19922445
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. An integrative view of sexual selection in Tribolium flour beetles.
    Fedina TY; Lewis SM
    Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc; 2008 May; 83(2):151-71. PubMed ID: 18429767
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Sexual conflict does not drive reproductive isolation in experimental populations of Drosophila pseudoobscura.
    Bacigalupe LD; Crudgington HS; Hunter F; Moore AJ; Snook RR
    J Evol Biol; 2007 Sep; 20(5):1763-71. PubMed ID: 17714294
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Evolution of female remating behaviour following experimental removal of sexual selection.
    Pitnick S; Brown WD; Miller GT
    Proc Biol Sci; 2001 Mar; 268(1467):557-63. PubMed ID: 11297171
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Experimental manipulation of sexual selection promotes greater male mating capacity but does not alter sperm investment.
    Crudgington HS; Fellows S; Badcock NS; Snook RR
    Evolution; 2009 Apr; 63(4):926-38. PubMed ID: 19236477
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Experimental evolution of sperm quality via postcopulatory sexual selection in house mice.
    Firman RC; Simmons LW
    Evolution; 2010 May; 64(5):1245-56. PubMed ID: 19922447
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The benefits of male ejaculate sex peptide transfer in Drosophila melanogaster.
    Fricke C; Wigby S; Hobbs R; Chapman T
    J Evol Biol; 2009 Feb; 22(2):275-86. PubMed ID: 19032499
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Experimental evolution exposes female and male responses to sexual selection and conflict in Tribolium castaneum.
    Michalczyk Ł; Millard AL; Martin OY; Lumley AJ; Emerson BC; Gage MJ
    Evolution; 2011 Mar; 65(3):713-24. PubMed ID: 21091981
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Density-dependent sexual selection in external fertilizers: variances in male and female fertilization success along the continuum from sperm limitation to sexual conflict in the sea urchin Strongylocentrotus franciscanus.
    Levitan DR
    Am Nat; 2004 Sep; 164(3):298-309. PubMed ID: 15478086
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Intensity of sexual selection along the anisogamy-isogamy continuum.
    Bjork A; Pitnick S
    Nature; 2006 Jun; 441(7094):742-5. PubMed ID: 16760976
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Experimental evidence that sexual conflict influences the opportunity, form and intensity of sexual selection.
    Hall MD; Bussière LF; Hunt J; Brooks R
    Evolution; 2008 Sep; 62(9):2305-15. PubMed ID: 18540949
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Assessing the potential for an ongoing arms race within and between the sexes: selection and heritable variation.
    Friberg U; Lew TA; Byrne PG; Rice WR
    Evolution; 2005 Jul; 59(7):1540-51. PubMed ID: 16153039
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Bateman's principle and immunity: phenotypically plastic reproductive strategies predict changes in immunological sex differences.
    McKean KA; Nunney L
    Evolution; 2005 Jul; 59(7):1510-7. PubMed ID: 16153036
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. No evidence that experimental manipulation of sexual conflict drives premating reproductive isolation in Drosophila melanogaster.
    Wigby S; Chapman T
    J Evol Biol; 2006 Jul; 19(4):1033-9. PubMed ID: 16780504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Standing genetic variance for female resistance to harm from males and its relationship to intralocus sexual conflict.
    Lew TA; Morrow EH; Rice WR
    Evolution; 2006 Jan; 60(1):97-105. PubMed ID: 16568635
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Male fecundity stimulation: conflict and cooperation within and between the sexes: model analyses and coevolutionary dynamics.
    Alonzo SH; Pizzari T
    Am Nat; 2010 Feb; 175(2):174-85. PubMed ID: 20028216
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 16.