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 *

211 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24789896)

  • 1. How choosy should I be? The relative searching time predicts evolution of choosiness under direct sexual selection.
    Etienne L; Rousset F; Godelle B; Courtiol A
    Proc Biol Sci; 2014 Jun; 281(1785):20140190. PubMed ID: 24789896
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The Evolution of Mutual Mate Choice under Direct Benefits.
    Courtiol A; Etienne L; Feron R; Godelle B; Rousset F
    Am Nat; 2016 Nov; 188(5):521-538. PubMed ID: 27788341
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The evolution of male mate choice in insects: a synthesis of ideas and evidence.
    Bonduriansky R
    Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc; 2001 Aug; 76(3):305-39. PubMed ID: 11569787
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Fluctuating Dynamics of Mate Availability Promote the Evolution of Flexible Choosiness in Both Sexes.
    Chevalier L; Labonne J; Galipaud M; Dechaume-Moncharmont FX
    Am Nat; 2020 Dec; 196(6):730-742. PubMed ID: 33211564
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The evolution of age-specific choosiness when mating.
    Cotto O; Day T
    J Evol Biol; 2021 Mar; 34(3):477-485. PubMed ID: 33314385
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Direct detection of male quality can facilitate the evolution of female choosiness and indicators of good genes: Evolution across a continuum of indicator mechanisms.
    Dhole S; Stern CA; Servedio MR
    Evolution; 2018 Apr; 72(4):770-784. PubMed ID: 29528491
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Mate sampling influences the intensity of sexual selection and the evolution of costly sexual ornaments.
    Muniz DG; Machado G
    J Theor Biol; 2018 Jun; 447():74-83. PubMed ID: 29567325
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. On the architecture of mate choice decisions: preference functions and choosiness are distinct traits.
    Neelon DP; Rodríguez RL; Höbel G
    Proc Biol Sci; 2019 Feb; 286(1897):20182830. PubMed ID: 30963823
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The evolution of age-specific choosiness and reproductive isolation in a model with overlapping generations.
    Cotto O; Servedio MR; Day T
    Evolution; 2022 Feb; 76(2):225-235. PubMed ID: 34877658
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Variation in mate choice and mating preferences: a review of causes and consequences.
    Jennions MD; Petrie M
    Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc; 1997 May; 72(2):283-327. PubMed ID: 9155244
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Evolution of choosiness dictates whether search costs of mate choice enhance speciation by sexual selection.
    Yukilevich R; Aoki F
    J Evol Biol; 2022 Aug; 35(8):1045-1059. PubMed ID: 35830473
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Mate sampling and choosiness in the sand goby.
    Lindström K; Lehtonen TK
    Proc Biol Sci; 2013 Aug; 280(1765):20130983. PubMed ID: 23804620
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Mate Preferences and Choosiness Are Distinct Components of Mate Choice in Eastern Gray Treefrogs (
    Feagles O; Höbel G
    Am Nat; 2022 Oct; 200(4):506-517. PubMed ID: 36150198
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Finding the one: optimal choosiness under sequential mate choice.
    Henshaw JM
    J Evol Biol; 2018 Aug; 31(8):1193-1203. PubMed ID: 29802664
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Why is mutual mate choice not the norm? Operational sex ratios, sex roles and the evolution of sexually dimorphic and monomorphic signalling.
    Kokko H; Johnstone RA
    Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci; 2002 Mar; 357(1419):319-30. PubMed ID: 11958700
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. MUTUAL MATE CHOICE AND SEX DIFFERENCES IN CHOOSINESS.
    Johnstone RA; Reynolds JD; Deutsch JC
    Evolution; 1996 Aug; 50(4):1382-1391. PubMed ID: 28565695
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Does competition allow male mate choosiness in threespine sticklebacks?
    Candolin U; Salesto T
    Am Nat; 2009 Feb; 173(2):273-7. PubMed ID: 19117472
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Female choosiness leads to the evolution of individually distinctive males.
    Thom MD; Dytham C
    Evolution; 2012 Dec; 66(12):3736-42. PubMed ID: 23206132
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Coevolution of parasite virulence and host mating strategies.
    Ashby B; Boots M
    Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A; 2015 Oct; 112(43):13290-5. PubMed ID: 26430236
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The costs of choice in sexual selection.
    Pomiankowski A
    J Theor Biol; 1987 Sep; 128(2):195-218. PubMed ID: 3431135
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.