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 *

140 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33556376)

  • 1. Moderately elevated glucocorticoids increase mate choosiness but do not affect sexual proceptivity or preferences in female gray treefrogs.
    Baugh AT; Gall MD; Silver SC; Bee MA
    Horm Behav; 2021 Apr; 130():104950. PubMed ID: 33556376
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. In your CORT: Corticosterone and its receptors in the brain underlie mate choosiness in female Cope's gray treefrogs (Hyla chrysoscelis).
    Rodriguez-Santiago M; Ruppert A; Gall MD; Hoke K; Bee MA; Baugh AT
    Horm Behav; 2024 Mar; 159():105477. PubMed ID: 38245919
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. Glucocorticoids, male sexual signals, and mate choice by females: Implications for sexual selection.
    Leary CJ; Baugh AT
    Gen Comp Endocrinol; 2020 Mar; 288():113354. PubMed ID: 31830474
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Progesterone and prostaglandin F2α induce species-typical female preferences for male sexual displays in Cope's gray treefrog (Hyla chrysoscelis).
    Ward JL; Love EK; Baugh AT; Gordon NM; Tanner JC; Bee MA
    Physiol Behav; 2015 Dec; 152(Pt A):280-7. PubMed ID: 26454212
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. The difference a day makes: Breeding remodels hearing, hormones and behavior in female Cope's gray treefrogs (Hyla chrysoscelis).
    Gall MD; Bee MA; Baugh AT
    Horm Behav; 2019 Feb; 108():62-72. PubMed ID: 30653979
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Advertisement-call preferences in diploid-tetraploid treefrogs (Hyla chrysoscelis and Hyla versicolor): implications for mate choice and the evolution of communication systems.
    Gerhardt HC
    Evolution; 2005 Feb; 59(2):395-408. PubMed ID: 15807424
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Larger females are choosier in the gray treefrog (Hyla versicolor).
    Kuczynski MC; Getty T; Gering E
    Behav Processes; 2017 Feb; 135():29-35. PubMed ID: 27913165
    [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. Signal recognition by green treefrogs (Hyla cinerea) and Cope's gray treefrogs (Hyla chrysoscelis) in naturally fluctuating noise.
    Vélez A; Bee MA
    J Comp Psychol; 2013 May; 127(2):166-78. PubMed ID: 23106802
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Glucocorticoid-Mediated Changes in Male Green Treefrog Vocalizations Alter Attractiveness to Females.
    Leary CJ; Crocker-Buta S; Holloway A; Kennedy JGC
    Integr Comp Biol; 2021 Jul; 61(1):283-291. PubMed ID: 33940612
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Black widows as plastic wallflowers: female choosiness increases with indicators of high mate availability in a natural population.
    Scott CE; McCann S; Andrade MCB
    Sci Rep; 2020 Jun; 10(1):8981. PubMed ID: 32488193
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. The effects of experience on the development of sexual behaviour of males and females of the banded demoiselle (Calopteryx splendens).
    Verzijden MN; Scobell SK; Svensson EI
    Behav Processes; 2014 Nov; 109 Pt B():180-9. PubMed ID: 25193353
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.