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 *

356 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16261726)

  • 21. Evolutionary reduction in testes size and competitive fertilization success in response to the experimental removal of sexual selection in dung beetles.
    Simmons LW; García-González F
    Evolution; 2008 Oct; 62(10):2580-91. PubMed ID: 18691259
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. The roles of natural and sexual selection during adaptation to a novel environment.
    Rundle HD; Chenoweth SF; Blows MW
    Evolution; 2006 Nov; 60(11):2218-25. PubMed ID: 17236415
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Does egg competition occur in marine broadcast-spawners?
    Marshall DJ; Evans JP
    J Evol Biol; 2005 Sep; 18(5):1244-52. PubMed ID: 16135120
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Sexual selection and immune function in Drosophila melanogaster.
    McKean KA; Nunney L
    Evolution; 2008 Feb; 62(2):386-400. PubMed ID: 18070086
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Patterns of speciation in endemic Mexican Goodeid fish: sexual conflict or early radiation?
    Ritchie MG; Webb SA; Graves JA; Magurran AE; Macias Garcia C
    J Evol Biol; 2005 Jul; 18(4):922-9. PubMed ID: 16033564
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. 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]  

  • 27. Can cytoplasmic incompatibility inducing Wolbachia promote the evolution of mate preferences?
    Champion de Crespigny FE; Butlin RK; Wedell N
    J Evol Biol; 2005 Jul; 18(4):967-77. PubMed ID: 16033569
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Adaptive speciation when assortative mating is based on female preference for male marker traits.
    Doebeli M
    J Evol Biol; 2005 Nov; 18(6):1587-600. PubMed ID: 16313470
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Sexual conflict and the evolution of female preferences for indicators of male quality.
    van Doorn GS; Weissing FJ
    Am Nat; 2006 Dec; 168(6):742-57. PubMed ID: 17109317
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Relative abundance and the species-specific reinforcement of male mating preference in the Chrysochus (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) hybrid zone.
    Peterson MA; Honchak BM; Locke SE; Beeman TE; Mendoza J; Green J; Buckingham KJ; White MA; Monsen KJ
    Evolution; 2005 Dec; 59(12):2639-55. PubMed ID: 16526511
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Sexual selection for male dominance reduces opportunities for female mate choice in the European bitterling (Rhodeus sericeus).
    Reichard M; Bryja J; Ondracková M; Dávidová M; Kaniewska P; Smith C
    Mol Ecol; 2005 Apr; 14(5):1533-42. PubMed ID: 15813791
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Female preference for symmetrical males as a by-product of selection for mate recognition.
    Johnstone RA
    Nature; 1994 Nov; 372(6502):172-5. PubMed ID: 7969449
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Male versus female mate choice: sexual selection and the evolution of species recognition via reinforcement.
    Servedio MR
    Evolution; 2007 Dec; 61(12):2772-89. PubMed ID: 17924955
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Natural and sexual selection giveth and taketh away reproductive barriers: models of population divergence in guppies.
    Labonne J; Hendry AP
    Am Nat; 2010 Jul; 176(1):26-39. PubMed ID: 20477531
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Postcopulatory fertilization bias as a form of cryptic sexual selection.
    Calsbeek R; Bonneaud C
    Evolution; 2008 May; 62(5):1137-48. PubMed ID: 18298641
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Can non-directional male mating preferences facilitate honest female ornamentation?
    Chenoweth SF; Doughty P; Kokko H
    Ecol Lett; 2006 Feb; 9(2):179-84. PubMed ID: 16958883
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Operational sex ratio and density do not affect directional selection on male sexual ornaments and behavior.
    Head ML; Lindholm AK; Brooks R
    Evolution; 2008 Jan; 62(1):135-44. PubMed ID: 18067568
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Mating density and the strength of sexual selection against deleterious alleles in Drosophila melanogaster.
    Sharp NP; Agrawal AF
    Evolution; 2008 Apr; 62(4):857-67. PubMed ID: 18221380
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. 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]  

  • 40. The effect of an inversion system and the time interval between matings on postcopulatory sexual selection in the seaweed fly, Coelopa frigida.
    Blyth JE; Gilburn AS
    Heredity (Edinb); 2005 Aug; 95(2):174-8. PubMed ID: 15999137
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 18.