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 *

190 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9560236)

  • 1. Runaway ornament diversity caused by Fisherian sexual selection.
    Pomiankowski A; Iwasa Y
    Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A; 1998 Apr; 95(9):5106-11. PubMed ID: 9560236
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Long-term persistence of exaggerated ornaments under Fisherian runaway despite costly mate search.
    Waffender A; Henshaw JM
    J Evol Biol; 2023 Jan; 36(1):45-56. PubMed ID: 36514848
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Sexual selection and the evolution of costly female preferences: spatial effects.
    Day T
    Evolution; 2000 Jun; 54(3):715-30. PubMed ID: 10937247
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. THE EVOLUTION OF MATE PREFERENCES FOR MULTIPLE SEXUAL ORNAMENTS.
    Iwasa Y; Pomiankowski A
    Evolution; 1994 Jun; 48(3):853-867. PubMed ID: 28568273
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Continual change in mate preferences.
    Iwasa Y; Pomiankowski A
    Nature; 1995 Oct; 377(6548):420-2. PubMed ID: 7566117
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Signaling efficacy drives the evolution of larger sexual ornaments by sexual selection.
    Tazzyman SJ; Iwasa Y; Pomiankowski A
    Evolution; 2014 Jan; 68(1):216-29. PubMed ID: 24099137
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. The evolution of female preferences for multiple indicators of quality.
    van Doorn GS; Weissing FJ
    Am Nat; 2004 Aug; 164(2):173-86. PubMed ID: 15278842
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Testing the genetics underlying the co-evolution of mate choice and ornament in the wild.
    Qvarnström A; Brommer JE; Gustafsson L
    Nature; 2006 May; 441(7089):84-6. PubMed ID: 16672970
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. THE EVOLUTION OF COSTLY MATE PREFERENCES I. FISHER AND BIASED MUTATION.
    Pomiankowski A; Iwasa Y; Nee S
    Evolution; 1991 Sep; 45(6):1422-1430. PubMed ID: 28563819
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Sexual selection and condition-dependent mate preferences.
    Cotton S; Small J; Pomiankowski A
    Curr Biol; 2006 Sep; 16(17):R755-65. PubMed ID: 16950102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The dilemma of Fisherian sexual selection: mate choice for indirect benefits despite rarity and overall weakness of trait-preference genetic correlation.
    Greenfield MD; Alem S; Limousin D; Bailey NW
    Evolution; 2014 Dec; 68(12):3524-36. PubMed ID: 25308282
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Sympatric speciation by sexual selection.
    Higashi M; Takimoto G; Yamamura N
    Nature; 1999 Dec; 402(6761):523-6. PubMed ID: 10591210
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A reformulation of Fisher's runaway identifies the heritability of mate choices as a key parameter and highlights limitations of the hypothesis.
    Fry JD
    Proc Biol Sci; 2024 Jan; 291(2015):20232366. PubMed ID: 38264777
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Coevolution of costly mate choice and condition-dependent display of good genes.
    Houle D; Kondrashov AS
    Proc Biol Sci; 2002 Jan; 269(1486):97-104. PubMed ID: 11788042
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Runaway sexual selection without genetic correlations: social environments and flexible mate choice initiate and enhance the Fisher process.
    Bailey NW; Moore AJ
    Evolution; 2012 Sep; 66(9):2674-84. PubMed ID: 22946795
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Runaway sexual selection when female preferences are directly selected.
    Hall DW; Kirkpatrick M; West B
    Evolution; 2000 Dec; 54(6):1862-9. PubMed ID: 11209766
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The evolution of female mate choice by sexual conflict.
    Gavrilets S; Arnqvist G; Friberg U
    Proc Biol Sci; 2001 Mar; 268(1466):531-9. PubMed ID: 11296866
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Honesty, perception and population divergence in sexually selected traits.
    Schluter D; Price T
    Proc Biol Sci; 1993 Jul; 253(1336):117-22. PubMed ID: 8396772
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.