Selection against migrants contributes to the rapid evolution of ecologically dependent reproductive isolation

By A. Hendry. 2004

208 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b775e558a3f8a10525bad299c8740da694f50f16

How researchers see this paper

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

1. A. Hendry
2. P. Nosil
3. A. Hoffmann
4. F. Allendorf
5. W. Lowe
6. Jason P. Sexton
7. D. Sharpe
8. F. Palstra

Citations in the corpus

• The Contemporary Evolution of Fitness (2018, background): “A problem here, however, is that immigrants can have little relevance to local population fitness if they do not interbreed with residents owing to low survival or reproductive success of the former (Hendry 2004, Nosil et al. 2005, Hendry 2017).”
• REPRODUCTIVE ISOLATION CAUSED BY NATURAL SELECTION AGAINST IMMIGRANTS FROM DIVERGENT HABITATS (2005, background): “However, the strength of this feedback should ultimately fade due to decreasing numbers of immigrants, and thus diminishing selection for habitat preference, each generation (Hendry 2004).”
• What can genetics tell us about population connectivity? (2010, background): “In contrast, natural selection can reduce effective gene flow when individuals move between divergent ecological environments (Hendry 2004; Nosil et al. 2005).”
• Genetic and environmental contributions to the morphology of lake and stream stickleback: implications for gene flow and reproductive isolation (2008, methodology): “If adaptive phenotypic differences have a strong genetic basis, or reflect permanent plastic developmental responses to the home environment, then individuals migrating from one environment to another should be maladapted and thus suffer reduced fitness (Hendry, 2004; Nosil et al., 2005).”
• Divergent selection and heterogeneous genomic divergence (2009, background): “Due to divergent local adaptation, immigrants have lower fitness than residents, yielding selection against immigrants (Mallet & Barton 1989; Funk 1998; Via et al. 2000; Hendry 2004; Nosil et al. 2005 for review).”
• On the role of male competition in speciation: a review and research agenda (2018, background): “Selection against migrants could then lead to ecological specialization and eventual speciation (Hendry 2004; Nosil et al.”
• GENETIC ISOLATION BY ENVIRONMENT OR DISTANCE: WHICH PATTERN OF GENE FLOW IS MOST COMMON? (2014, background): “Empirical studies have shown that local adaptation to different environments can result in strong selection against immigrants (e.g., Via et al. 2000; Hendry 2004; Nosil et al. 2005) and against hybrids (Schluter 2000; Rundle and Whitlock 2001).”
• Genetic estimates of contemporary effective population size: what can they tell us about the importance of genetic stochasticity for wild population persistence? (2008, background): “…potential can be further reduced due to population divergence as a consequence of (changes in) selection regimes underlying quantitative traits (Hendry 2004; Nosil et al. 2005) and/or enhanced genetic drift (Johansson et al. 2007; Willi et al. 2007a), which may ultimately result in selection…”
• The multifarious effects of dispersal and gene flow on contemporary adaptation (2007, background): “Second, dispersers may suffer reduced survival or reproductive success owing to unfamiliarity with, or maladaptation to, the new environment (Bensch et al . 1998; Hendry 2004; Nosil, Vines & Funk 2005).”