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 *

157 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36150198)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Female guppies agree to differ: phenotypic and genetic variation in mate-choice behavior and the consequences for sexual selection.
    Brooks R; Endler JA
    Evolution; 2001 Aug; 55(8):1644-55. PubMed ID: 11580024
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. Female discrimination thresholds frequently exceed local male display variation: implications for mate choice dynamics and sexual selection.
    Höbel G
    J Evol Biol; 2016 Mar; 29(3):572-82. PubMed ID: 26663413
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. Mate choice strategies in a spatially-explicit model environment.
    Ferreira GBS; Scheutz M; Boyd SK
    PLoS One; 2018; 13(8):e0202680. PubMed ID: 30138426
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The evolution of mating preferences for genetic attractiveness and quality in the presence of sensory bias.
    Henshaw JM; Fromhage L; Jones AG
    Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A; 2022 Aug; 119(33):e2206262119. PubMed ID: 35939704
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.