Cultural artifacts: a comparison of senescence in natural, laboratory-adapted and artificially selected lines of Drosophila melanogaster

By C. Linnen, M. Tatar, Daniel E. L. Promislow. 2001

93 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Senescence in natural populations of animals: Widespread evidence and its implications for bio-gerontology (2012, background): “…and suggests that the responses of wild-caught animals o typical treatments can differ markedly from those subjected o years of selection for laboratory life (e.g. Chen et al., 2007; iorgio et al., 2012; Harper et al., 2006; Linnen et al., 2001; Sgro nd Partridge, 2000; van Voorhies et al., 2005).”
Male Drosophila melanogaster adjust ejaculate size based on female mating status, fecundity, and age (2011, background): “Older females, however, probably contribute a relatively high proportion to natural populations, given that individuals captured in the field can survive for over a hundred days in the laboratory (Linnen et al. 2001), and females presumably are receptive for up to 2 months (Mack et al. 2003).”
The strain concept in phytoplankton ecology (2009, background): “Such a correlated response has been seen in Drosophila cultures where laboratoryimposed breeding regimes have selected for greater early fecundity with a concomitant, unintentional decrease in longevity (Linnen et al., 2001).”