↓ Skip to main content

The Evolution of Sex and its Consequences

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 3: The evolution of sexes.
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
180 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
73 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Chapter title
The evolution of sexes.
Chapter number 3
Book title
The Evolution of Sex and its Consequences
Published in
Experientia Supplementum, January 1987
DOI 10.1007/978-3-0348-6273-8_3
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-3-03-486275-2, 978-3-03-486273-8
Authors

Hoekstra, R F, R. F. Hoekstra, Hoekstra, R. F.

Abstract

It is very likely that sexual differentiation into two morphologically indistinguishable mating types has preceded the evolution of anisogamy. Therefore, the study of the evolution of mating types in an isogamous population is more informative for understanding the forces responsible for the evolution of different sexes than the study of the evolution of anisogamy; the latter represents the secondary problem of how, after the establishment of two sexes, an increasing degree of gamete dimorphism may evolve. Mating type evolution has been analyzed theoretically in population genetic models. These explorations show that mating types may evolve as a consequence of selection for more efficient gamete recognition, and also as a result of intragenomic conflict between nuclear and cytoplasmic DNA. However, in both cases the selection forces have to be very strong, which makes these possible explanations less convincing. Nearly all theories proposed for the evolution of anisogamy assume two conflicting selection forces to be relevant: selection for greater gamete productivity, and selection for greater zygote size. Although the explanation is intuitively plausible, the comparative evidence is a bit disappointing. Alternatively, anisogamy can be explained as a side-effect of selection for a greater efficiency in finding a mating partner by using sexual pheromones. Firm empirical evidence is lacking, however. In both problem areas--mating type evolution and anisogamy evolution--experimental work is badly needed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
Germany 2 3%
Netherlands 2 3%
Spain 1 1%
Unknown 66 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 22%
Researcher 16 22%
Professor 12 16%
Student > Bachelor 11 15%
Other 4 5%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 4 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 38 52%
Environmental Science 6 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 7%
Social Sciences 5 7%
Neuroscience 4 5%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 6 8%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 April 2024.
All research outputs
#8,247,922
of 24,702,628 outputs
Outputs from Experientia Supplementum
#2
of 12 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,739
of 45,730 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experientia Supplementum
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,702,628 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.7. This one scored the same or higher as 10 of them.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 45,730 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them