The DOI matches its Crossref record; 106 of the 111 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 21 of the 130 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective
Open accessAbstract
The African malaria mosquito Anopheles gambiae is undergoing speciation, being split into the M and S molecular forms. Speciation is the main process promoting biological diversity, thus, new vector species might complicate disease transmission. Genetic differentiation between the molecular forms has been extensively studied, but phenotypic differences between them, the evolutionary forces that generated divergence, and the mechanisms that maintain their genetic isolation have only recently been addressed. Here, we review recent studies suggesting that selection mediated by larval predation and competition promoted divergence between temporary and permanent freshwater habitats. These differences explain the sharp discontinuity in distribution of the molecular forms between rice fields and surrounding savanna, but they can also explain the concurrent cline between humid and arid environments due to the dependence on permanent habitats in the latter. Although less pronounced, differences in adult body size, reproductive output, and longevity also suggest that the molecular forms have adapted to distinct niches. Reproductive isolation between the molecular forms is achieved by spatial swarm segregation, although within-swarm mate recognition appears to play a role in certain locations. The implications of these results to disease transmission and control are discussed and many of the gaps in our understanding are highlighted.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
54 Own interpretation · 42 No full text of the sources · 19 Sources not found · 10 No basis given · 9 Partly supported · 7 Not checked yet · 7 Own result · 4 Supported · 4 Own method · 3 Supported so far · 1 Couldn’t confirm · accuracy not yet measured
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Recently, these issues were addressed using whole genome micro-array that surprisingly affirmed that high differentiation loci are concentrated only in the two previously known (and maybe a third) miniscule regions (above), which together encompass only ~ 1% of the genome (Turner et al. 2005).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > The recognition of the molecular forms
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Turner et al. 2005 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results identify two strongly supported differentiated regions, on chromosomes 2L and X, plus a suggestive third on 2R. The Microarray analysis section estimates the three regions together at 1.2% of the assembled genome. But the Introduction says earlier marker studies found appreciable differentiation only near the end of the X chromosome, so the claim that both main regions were previously known is not supported. (LLM, conf=0.85)
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Larval surveys in Mali, where the molecular forms are sympatric, revealed that both forms shared many larval sites without clear segregation (Edillo et al., 2002), very similar to findings in East Africa on An. gambiae and and An. arabiensis (Gimnig et al., 2001).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Variation in traits of the egg and larva
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Edillo et al., 2002 source
- Supportedcites Gimnig et al., 2001 source
The Discussion reports that An. gambiae and An. arabiensis had remarkably similar larval habitats in western Kenya and were collected together more often than expected by chance. The Abstract likewise reports no segregation into distinct larval habitats. The Mali finding is attributed to a different citation in the citing sentence, not to this paper. (LLM, conf=0.92)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Because the relative contribution of environmental variation to these traits is very large (Koella and Boete, 2002; Lambrechts et al., 2006; Lehmann et al., 2006; Schwartz and Koella, 2002), independent comparisons of these traits in multiple settings will be valuable.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Life history and vectorial capacity traits in adults
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Koella and Boete, 2002 source
- Partly supportedcites Lambrechts et al., 2006 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion reports that glucose concentration accounted for substantial variation in mosquito infection load, and the Results show that it affected mortality. But the paper examined these specific outcomes, not life-history and vectorial-capacity traits generally; for infection load, the measured environmental factor explained 11.7% of variation, so the broader claim that its relative contribution is ‘very large’ is not established by this source. (LLM, conf=0.84)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Lehmann et al., 2006 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Contrary to this prediction, malaria transmission in villages surrounded by rice fields where the M form predominates is low (Diuk-Wasser et al., 2005; Manoukis et al., 2006), suggesting that other factors reduce vectorial capacity at these locations.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Life history and vectorial capacity traits in adults
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Diuk-Wasser et al., 2005 source
The Introduction says malaria transmission is generally lower in irrigated rice-growing villages near the Office du Niger than in nearby nonirrigated villages, and gives lower entomological infection rates for the irrigated villages. The Methods report that 98.6% of the An. gambiae s.s. identified in the region were of the Mopti, or M, form. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Partly supportedcites Manoukis et al., 2006 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The introduction reports that malaria transmission in irrigated areas with high vector densities can be the same as or lower than in nearby nonirrigated areas; it also reports lower malaria prevalence in irrigated Niono villages. The Discussion says the sampled Anopheles gambiae were likely almost all of the Mopti chromosomal form, but our copy does not identify that as the “M form,” so that specific designation is not established. (LLM, conf=0.82)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Importantly, cross mating between the molecular forms occurred indoors as much as mating between members of the same form (Dao et al., 2008), indicating that chemical cues such as pheromones and cuticular hydrocarbons do not play a major role in form recognition, unless such signals are only released or perceived during swarming.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Mating behaviour and reproductive isolation between the molecular forms
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Dao et al., 2008 source
The Results section (Specificity of Indoor Mating) reports that cross-mating in indoor experiments was as common as mating within the same molecular form (16.1% versus 18.9%). This directly supports the attributed claim in the experimental setting. (LLM, conf=0.95)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Consistent with that hypothesis, recent results suggest that the length of the hydroperiod of larval habitats is the principal ecological factor producing divergence between the molecular forms through selection mediated by predation and competition (Diabate et al., 2008).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > The ecological factors that promoted divergence
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Diabate et al., 2008 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion (page not provided) links the forms’ temporary and permanent larval habitats to hydroperiod and suggests that predation and competition shape their habitat segregation. It describes hydroperiod as a primary basis for divergence in a number of freshwater species, but does not establish it as the principal ecological factor producing divergence between these molecular forms. (LLM, conf=0.85)
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The significant difference between forms, treating populations as fixed effects could not be generalized to “any” M and S population if both population and the interaction form*population were considered as random effects (P>0.28) because of the large variation between populations (especially between the M populations from Niono and Dongebougou; Figure 2).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Life history and vectorial capacity traits in adults
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The effect of body size on longevity was not significant (P>0.45).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Life history and vectorial capacity traits in adults
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, infection prevalence with Plasmodium falciparum was similar between the forms (Table 1).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Life history and vectorial capacity traits in adults
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This was also the case for anthropophily and endophily (Table 1).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Life history and vectorial capacity traits in adults
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Notably no post zygotic isolation was detected in laboratory crosses of offspring of wild females (Diabate et al. 2007).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Mating behaviour and reproductive isolation between the molecular forms
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Diabate et al. 2007 source
- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“The two rDNA haplotypes were used to define the molecular forms”
- Also stated in: § The recognition of the molecular forms · plain
“The two rDNA haplotypes were used to define the molecular forms (della Torre et al., 2001; Favia et al., 1997; Favia et al., 2001).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > The recognition of the molecular forms
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § The recognition of the molecular forms · plain
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Here, we review recent studies suggesting that selection mediated by larval predation and competition promoted divergence between temporary and permanent freshwater habitats.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Abstract
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Recent studies revealed phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms across life stages.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Introduction
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Early studies of An. gambiae in West Africa based on chromosomal inversions revealed deficits of heterozygotes (with respect to corresponding Hardy-Weinberg expectations) in a number of inversions.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > The recognition of the molecular forms
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The phylogenetic relationship among the members of the complex is obscured by introgression.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Introduction
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Based on these data, five partly isolated populations were defined and named Forest, Savanna, Bamako, Mopti, and Bissau chromosomal forms (Bryan et al., 1982; Coluzzi et al., 1985; Coluzzi et al., 1979; Toure et al., 1998).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > The recognition of the molecular forms
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The African malaria mosquito Anopheles gambiae is undergoing speciation, being split into the M and S molecular forms.”
- Also stated in: § Introduction · plain
“Anopheles gambiae s.s. is undergoing speciation, being split into two “molecular forms”, currently named ‘M’ and ‘S’.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Introduction · plain
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These differences explain the sharp discontinuity in distribution of the molecular forms between rice fields and surrounding savanna, but they can also explain the concurrent cline between humid and arid environments due to the dependence on permanent habitats in the latter.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The definitive evidence for the existence of the An. gambiae complex was obtained by crossing experiments revealing complete or partial sterility in the hybrids (Davidson, 1964)”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Davidson, 1964
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In arid pre-desert areas of Angola, the Forest chromosomal form was found despite the absence of inversions, such as 2La and 2Rb that are common in the similarly arid Sahel (Calzetta et al., 2008).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > The recognition of the molecular forms > What remains of the chromosomal forms?
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Calzetta et al., 2008 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although An. arabiensis extends beyond the eastern boundary of the M form into West Africa, comparing its abundance and ecology with that of the M form across this boundary might provide insights into the nature of this border.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Geographical distribution patterns
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The geographical ranges of the M and S molecular forms are rather stable.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Notably, in East Africa An. arabiensis occupies what appears to be the same niche the M form fills in West Africa.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Geographical distribution patterns
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The geographical ranges of the M and S molecular forms are rather stable.
In the paper
“and no differences were found in the egg desiccation tolerance (Dao, Yaro, Adamou, and Lehmann unpublished), suggesting that eggs of both forms experience similar conditions.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Variation in traits of the egg and larva
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Dao, Yaro, Adamou, and Lehmann unpublished
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“These selection pressures are at least partially distinct from those causing the divergence of the molecular forms (della Torre et al., 2002).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > The recognition of the molecular forms > What remains of the chromosomal forms?
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites della Torre et al., 2002 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Minor differences were detected in the time to hatch between eggs of the molecular forms (Yaro et al., 2006a)”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Variation in traits of the egg and larva
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Yaro et al., 2006a
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The co-occurrence of forms in many larval sites does not imply that they have the same ability to exploit these habitats.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Variation in traits of the egg and larva
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“This variation with aridity corresponds to seasonal fluctuations in form composition in the same locale (Toure et al., 1998).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Geographical distribution patterns
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Toure et al., 1998
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The geographical ranges of the M and S molecular forms are rather stable.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“(2) differentiation was detected only between two populations rather than five.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > The recognition of the molecular forms
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Most studies comparing the molecular forms have not fully accommodated variation between populations within-form.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
In the paper
“Nevertheless, incomplete but strong assortative mating was found between sympatric populations of the molecular forms in Mali (Tripet et al., 2001), where cross mating (1.2%) was substantially lower than expected by chance (17%).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > The recognition of the molecular forms
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Tripet et al., 2001 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“This study also confirmed that predators were much more abundant in rice fields than in puddles, as previously documented for permanent vs. temporary habitats (Williams, 2006).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Variation in traits of the egg and larva
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Williams, 2006
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Besides studies on composition of the molecular forms in various locations and on insecticide resistance, few studies focused on phenotypic differences between the molecular forms.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“With one possible exception finding two M form specimens in East Africa (Masendu et al., 2004), there is no indication for change in these boundaries, hence we assume their ranges are rather stable (Figure 1).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Geographical distribution patterns
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Masendu et al., 2004 source
hedgedn = 2- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The geographical ranges of the M and S molecular forms are rather stable.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The most remarkable discontinuity in the distribution of the molecular forms is displayed between rice field areas where the M form is found exclusively and surrounding savanna where the S form predominates, at least during the wet season (Table 1).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Variation in traits of the egg and larva
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The geographical ranges of the M and S molecular forms are rather stable.
In the paper
“Experimental field studies, using transplantation cages into which first instar larvae of one or both forms were placed revealed that the S form outperformed the M form in both temporary puddles as well as rice fields (Diabate et al. 2005).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Variation in traits of the egg and larva
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Diabate et al. 2005 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Nonetheless, the narrow semi desert belt inhabited only by the M form reflects its greater aridity tolerance.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Geographical distribution patterns
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The geographical ranges of the M and S molecular forms are rather stable.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Recent models considered situations with incomplete barriers to gene flow, in which divergent selection operating on a few loci can gradually increase differentiation between populations until gene flow essentially ceases, specifically predicting heterogeneity across the genome (Wu, 2001; Wu and Ting, 2004).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > The recognition of the molecular forms
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Wu, 2001
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Wu and Ting, 2004 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The eastern boundary of the M form is puzzling because it does not coincide with known eco-geographic or biotic zones.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Geographical distribution patterns
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The geographical ranges of the M and S molecular forms are rather stable.
In the paper
“In addition to accommodating the apparently contradictory findings (above), direct evidence for this model showing selection signatures on the high differentiation “speciation islands” (tiny chromosomal regions encompassing less than 1% of the genome) in An. gambiae was obtained (Turner et al., 2007).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > The recognition of the molecular forms
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Turner et al., 2007 source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These studies explain the habitat segregation between rice fields and surrounding savanna based on the superior competitive power of the S form larvae in temporary habitats with low predation pressure, whereas the superior predator avoidance of the M form allows it to dominate in predator-rich larval habitats.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Variation in traits of the egg and larva
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The egg protein content of an M form was slightly higher than that of the S form, indicating that its total reproductive output is correspondingly higher than that of the S form (Yaro et al., 2006b).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Life history and vectorial capacity traits in adults
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Yaro et al., 2006b
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“In an independent study, longevity of F1 virgin females, representing offspring of wild collected females that were raised in the laboratory under uniform conditions was longer in the M molecular form across localities (Dao, Kassogue, Adamou, Yaro, and Lehmann unpublished, Figure 2).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Life history and vectorial capacity traits in adults
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Dao, Kassogue, Adamou, Yaro, and Lehmann unpublished
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Such variation in longevity between the forms could be of epidemiological importance because slight changes in longevity greatly change vectorial capacity.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Life history and vectorial capacity traits in adults
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Small changes in mosquito longevity produce large changes in vectorial capacity.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Because larval habitats in arid climate tend to be more permanent (as rain is too rare to sustain populations), the capacity of the M form to exploit such larval habitat explains its extended distribution into dryer environment.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Variation in traits of the egg and larva
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The molecular forms mate assortatively as evident based on sperm identification in mated females from Mali (Tripet et al. 2001).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Mating behaviour and reproductive isolation between the molecular forms
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Tripet et al. 2001 source
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Contrary to this prediction, malaria transmission in villages surrounded by rice fields where the M form predominates is low (Diuk-Wasser et al., 2005; Manoukis et al., 2006), suggesting that other factors reduce vectorial capacity at these locations.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Life history and vectorial capacity traits in adults
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The results of this study suggest that indoors mating occurs naturally only in the M form.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Mating behaviour and reproductive isolation between the molecular forms
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
In the paper
“The form composition in 26 swarms in Burkina Faso where the forms are sympatric revealed that males of both molecular forms were present in only four swarms (Diabate et al. 2006).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Mating behaviour and reproductive isolation between the molecular forms
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Diabate et al. 2006 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The low mixing of swarms in Mali suggests that swarm segregation alone accounts for the assortative mating observed by Tripet et al. (2001).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Mating behaviour and reproductive isolation between the molecular forms
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Tripet et al. (2001) source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Weak but inconclusive evidence for differences in composition of cuticular hydrocarbons between the molecular forms were detected (Caputo et al., 2007).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Mating behaviour and reproductive isolation between the molecular forms
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Caputo et al., 2007 source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Hence, the aquatic larva, rather than the terrestrial adult appears to possess the adaptation conferring aridity tolerance in the M form.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Variation in traits of the egg and larva
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Egg batch size of the M form was larger than that of the S form in accordance with the M form larger body size (Yaro et al., 2006b).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Life history and vectorial capacity traits in adults
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Yaro et al., 2006b
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Despite the inability to identify the underlying ecological factor and selective pressure operating on adults, these results suggest that life history traits including body size, reproductive output, and longevity have diverged between forms as a result of their exposure to different environments.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Life history and vectorial capacity traits in adults
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The results above provide the first empirical evidence for specific adaptive differences between the molecular forms and stress the role of larval predation as one of the selective forces contributing to their divergence.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Variation in traits of the egg and larva
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These trends would result in a higher vectorial capacity of the M form.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Life history and vectorial capacity traits in adults
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Longevity and reproductive output have a strong influence on vectorial capacity.
In the paper
“The egg protein content of an M form was slightly higher than that of the S form, indicating that its total reproductive output is correspondingly higher than that of the S form (Yaro et al., 2006b).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Life history and vectorial capacity traits in adults
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Yaro et al., 2006b
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Contrary to the findings from Burkina Faso, recent studies in Mali revealed a striking spatial segregation between sympatric molecular forms (Diabate et al. unpublished).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Mating behaviour and reproductive isolation between the molecular forms
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Diabate et al. unpublished
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“No difference was found in the relationship between egg batch size and body size between the forms.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Life history and vectorial capacity traits in adults
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Yaro et al., 2006b
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These studies explain the habitat segregation between rice fields and surrounding savanna based on the superior competitive power of the S form larvae in temporary habitats with low predation pressure, whereas the superior predator avoidance of the M form allows it to dominate in predator-rich larval habitats.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Variation in traits of the egg and larva
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“This level of mixed swarms was considerably lower than that expected by chance based on the form composition indoors during the same time.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Mating behaviour and reproductive isolation between the molecular forms
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Diabate et al. 2006 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The results above provide the first empirical evidence for specific adaptive differences between the molecular forms and stress the role of larval predation as one of the selective forces contributing to their divergence.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Variation in traits of the egg and larva
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These results suggest that spatial swarm segregation contributes to reproductive isolation, but that mate recognition within swarms is also needed to account for the low frequency of hybrids.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Mating behaviour and reproductive isolation between the molecular forms
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These results suggest that spatial swarm segregation contributes to reproductive isolation, but that mate recognition within swarms is also needed to account for the low frequency of hybrids.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Mating behaviour and reproductive isolation between the molecular forms
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Notably, all these studies measured flight tone of individuals which were not mate-seeking.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Mating behaviour and reproductive isolation between the molecular forms
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although the fitness of hybrids under natural conditions may be reduced, these results suggest that reproductive isolation between the molecular forms is primarily achieved by distinct mating behaviour.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Mating behaviour and reproductive isolation between the molecular forms
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“The overlap in flight tone of males and females between these species and forms was substantial, precluding it as the signal preventing cross mating.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Mating behaviour and reproductive isolation between the molecular forms
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Many larval sites remain wet for several weeks and will harbor intermediate predator community (Williams, 2006), possibly allowing more equal success of both forms as suggested by high frequency of larval sites shared by both forms.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > The ecological factors that promoted divergence
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“From disease transmission surveillance and control perspectives, the epidemiological importance of the subdivision of An. gambiae into molecular forms is modest or even low as argued by Curtis (Curtis, 2000).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > Public health implications
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Curtis, 2000 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Adaptation to permanent vs. temporary larval habitat, indirectly promotes spatial (and partly temporal) isolation between populations in arid and humid environments.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > How did mate preference evolve?
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Although plausible, there is little evidence to substantiate this hypothesis: (i) estimates of time based on molecular clocks cannot resolve dates on this scale e.g., (Krzywinski and Besansky, 2003); (ii) molecular clock assumes no gene flow between the species, whereas available evidence suggests that gene flow between the forms is ongoing (Tripet et al., 2001; Turner and Hahn, 2007), and the”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > Divergence riddles: Which form was first? When they split? What is their future?
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Few clues suggest that the S form preceded the M form, including its (1) larger geographical range (Figure 1), (2) its location in the center of the continent where humid habitats abound and populations are more stable, and (3) within-form polymorphism across the 2R speciation islands in populations from Cameroon appears higher in the S form (Turner at al. 2007), indicating that selection operated”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > Divergence riddles: Which form was first? When they split? What is their future?
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Turner at al. 2007 source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Selection against hybrids, is expected because their phenotype is intermediate and hence less adapted than one or the other pure form in each habitat.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > The ecological factors that promoted divergence
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Available evidence suggests that the molecular (and chromosomal) forms are highly efficient malaria vectors, despite minor differences (above).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > Public health implications
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Desiccation and parasitism may have also mediated divergent selection because they are probably correlated with predation pressure as are other factors (Blaustein and Chase, 2007).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > The ecological factors that promoted divergence
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Blaustein and Chase, 2007 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These results explain the sharpest discontinuity exhibited by the molecular forms - the segregation between rice fields and surrounding savanna.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > The ecological factors that promoted divergence
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Predator abundance is much higher in permanent larval habitats than in temporary ones.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Additionally, the affinity of the M form to aridity can also be explained by its ability to exploit permanent larval sites that sustain populations year round where rainfall is low.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > The ecological factors that promoted divergence
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“However, if these traits also affect mate choice, directly or indirectly, then reproductive isolation could evolve as a by-product of local adaptation (Rundle et al. 2007, Rice and Hostert 1993, Dodd 1989, Schluter 2000, Rundle et al. 2000, Nosil et al. 2002).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > How did mate preference evolve?
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Rundle et al. 2007
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Rice and Hostert 1993
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Dodd 1989
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Divergent natural selection primarily targets ecologically important traits, not mate-selection traits.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Genetic and phenotypic similarity indicates that divergence between the molecular forms is recent on evolutionary time scale.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > Divergence riddles: Which form was first? When they split? What is their future?
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This scenario may also explain the different mechanisms of assortative mating between populations in Mali (spatial swarm segregation) and Burkina Faso (within swarm recognition and spatial swarm segregation).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > How did mate preference evolve?
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 61
- Probably not a substantial claim. 29
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Larval adaptations to exploit temporary vs. ‘permanent’ freshwater habitats account for discontinuities in distribution of the molecular forms (Diabate et al. 2008) and provide evidence for ecological speciation (e.g., (Schluter, 2001).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Introduction
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Diabate et al. 2008 source
The Discussion (page not provided) reports that the molecular forms differ in their ability to exploit temporary puddles and relatively permanent rice fields, and that competition and predation help explain their habitat segregation. The separate ecological-speciation clause is cited to Schluter, not to Diabaté et al. (LLM, conf=0.91)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Schluter, 2001 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“No marked differentiation was found between the chromosomal forms using allozymes (Chianchi et al. 1983) and microsatellites outside inversions on chromosome II (Lanzaro et al., 1998), but fixed differences were found in the rDNA intergenic spacer located on the X chromosome separating Mopti from both Savanna and Bamako chromosomal forms in Mali (Favia et al., 1997).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > The recognition of the molecular forms
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Chianchi et al. 1983
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Supportedcites Lanzaro et al., 1998 source
The Lanzaro citation is attached to the microsatellite finding, not the allozyme or rDNA findings, which have separate citations. The Abstract and Results and Discussion (pages not available in our copy) report few differences outside chromosome 2 and only sporadic differences at loci elsewhere in the genome, based chiefly on comparisons of the Bamako and Mopti forms. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Favia et al., 1997 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“These studies revealed that developmental success of the molecular forms in the different larval habitats was dependent on the presence of predators: The success of the M form was higher than that of the S form in both habitats under predator pressure (Table 2).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Variation in traits of the egg and larva
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Diabate et al., 2008 source
The Discussion states that the forms’ ability to exploit larval habitats differed with predator presence and that M had higher developmental success than S in both habitats under predator pressure. Results Table 1 shows M exceeding S in predator-present puddles and rice fields; the Results note that the predation effect was significant in puddles but not separately significant in rice fields. (LLM, conf=0.94)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“In most theoretical models of sympatric and parapatric speciation, divergent natural selection plays a dominant role (Genner et al., 2007; Grant and Grant, 1979; Schluter, 2001; Wu, 2001; Wu and Ting, 2004).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > The ecological factors that promoted divergence
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites Genner et al., 2007 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The population-structure discussion (p. 8) concerns gene flow and statistical tests, while the conservation discussion (p. 9) concerns cichlid diversification from refugial populations. Searches for divergent natural selection and theoretical models of sympatric or parapatric speciation found no passage addressing the claim in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.74)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Grant and Grant, 1979 source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Schluter, 2001 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Could not verify
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Moreover, larval surveys in areas of sympatry failed to detect differences in habitat use by the molecular forms in Mali (Edillo et al., 2002) and by An. gambiae and An. arabiensis in Kenya (Gimnig et al., 2001).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > The ecological factors that promoted divergence
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Edillo et al., 2002 source
- Partly supportedcites Gimnig et al., 2001 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Abstract and Discussion report that An. gambiae and An. arabiensis had broadly similar larval habitats in western Kenya. However, the Results found one difference: habitats containing An. gambiae were more likely to have algae. Thus, the survey did not fail to detect all differences in habitat use. (LLM, conf=0.90)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“This could be a response to the lower overall productivity of more permanent sites (Diabate et al., 2008; Diabate et al., 2005; Diuk-Wasser et al., 2005).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Life history and vectorial capacity traits in adults
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Diabate et al., 2008 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results (‘Overall developmental success’; page unavailable) report that puddles produced more adults than the relatively permanent rice fields, but only in cages without predators. With predators present, the paper found no difference between habitats. It does not test whether higher M-form reproductive output is a response to site productivity. (LLM, conf=0.84)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Diabate et al., 2005 source
- Could not verifycites Diuk-Wasser et al., 2005 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion (page unavailable) considers competition for larval resources but says the authors lack a reliable way to assess habitat quality. The Results (page unavailable) mention more permanent water sources for An. funestus, not their relative productivity. Searches for M-form reproductive output and permanent-site productivity found no passage addressing the proposed explanation. (LLM, conf=0.76)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Insecticide resistance in Culex pipiens increased susceptibility to predators (Berticat et al., 2004).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Variation in traits of the egg and larva
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Berticat et al., 2004 source
The Summary (p. 1) reports that resistance genes increased the probability of predation in Culex pipiens compared with susceptible mosquitoes. The discussion on variability of the predation cost (p. 6) confirms a cost for every resistance gene studied, at the larval or adult stage or both. (LLM, conf=0.94)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Larvae of the S form developed faster than those of the M form in both permanent and temporary habitats, possibly as a response to the higher risk of desiccation in temporary larval habitats it typically occupies (Diabate et al., 2008).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Variation in traits of the egg and larva
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Diabate et al., 2008 source
The Results section (‘Developmental time’) reports that S-form larvae developed faster than M-form larvae across habitats. The Discussion explicitly proposes avoidance of larval-site desiccation as a probable explanation and identifies puddles as temporary, ephemeral habitats. (LLM, conf=0.94)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Research on phenotypic traits under natural conditions (except on disease transmission and insecticide resistance) has been scanty, limiting interpretation of the wealth of genetic information that has been accumulating over recent years, e.g., (Ribeiro et al., 2004; Stump et al., 2005; Turner et al., 2005).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > Adaptive variation in An. gambiae
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Ribeiro et al., 2004 source
- Partly supportedcites Stump et al., 2005 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion (page unavailable) says that genome scans can identify candidate regions even when adaptive traits are unknown, and that functional studies are needed to connect genetic findings to ecological and behavioral characteristics. This supports a gap between genetic information and trait-level interpretation, but it does not establish that research on natural-condition phenotypes has generally been scanty or that disease transmission and insecticide resistance are exceptions. (LLM, conf=0.82)
- Supportedcites Turner et al., 2005 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The citation follows “e.g.” and identifies examples of the accumulating genetic information. Turner et al. is such an example: its Results report a genome-wide analysis of genetic differentiation between the M and S forms of Anopheles gambiae. The paper is not being cited here as evidence for the separate claim that natural-condition phenotypic research has been scanty. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Field experiments demonstrated that the S form outperforms the M form in the absence of predators whereas the reverse is true if predator pressure increases.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > The ecological factors that promoted divergence
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Diabate et al., 2008 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion (page not provided) reports that, without predators, the S form did better in puddles but the M form did better in rice fields. It also reports higher M-form developmental success in both habitats under predator pressure. The claim omits the habitat qualification on the predator-free result. (LLM, conf=0.90)
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Such mutations might be fixed by drift before populations reconnect, or once populations merged, reinforced by selection, because of reduced fitness of hybrids (Coyne and Orr, 1997; Genner et al., 2007; Hatfield and Schulter, 1999; Mallet et al., 1998).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > How did mate preference evolve?
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Coyne and Orr, 1997 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
In the opening discussion (p. 295), Coyne and Orr suggest that stronger sexual isolation between sympatric taxa reflects reinforcement: selection for isolation when hybrids are unfit. The cited passage does not support the separate claim that mutations become fixed by drift before populations reconnect; a search for drift found no such account in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.86)
- Partly supportedcites Genner et al., 2007 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The population-structure discussion (p. 8) suggests that isolation may have been accompanied by genetic drift and random loss of alleles. It does not say that mutations became fixed before populations reconnected, or that selection reinforced them after merging because hybrids had reduced fitness. (LLM, conf=0.78)
- Not matchedcites Hatfield and Schulter, 1999
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Because the frequency of the kdr resistance allele is high in the S form but low in the M form (Table 1), its possible contribution to the results above should be evaluated.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Variation in traits of the egg and larva
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Because both contribute similarly to disease transmission, both are anthropophilic, biting at night, and indoor resting during the day – they can be targeted by similar means of adult control.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > Public health implications
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“New species of pathogens and vectors might change disease manifestations and transmission patterns if they differ in traits affecting pathogen virulence or vectorial capacity.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Introduction
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Crossing experiments led to the recognition of three fresh water species: An. gambiae s.s., An. arabiensis, An. quadriannulatus, and three brackish water species: An. bwambae, An. melas and An. merus, and later to the division of An. quadriannulatus into two species (Hunt et al., 1998).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Hunt et al., 1998 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Reproductive isolation between the molecular forms is achieved by spatial swarm segregation, although within-swarm mate recognition appears to play a role in certain locations.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Abstract
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Genetic differentiation between the molecular forms has been extensively studied, but phenotypic differences between them, the evolutionary forces that generated divergence, and the mechanisms that maintain their genetic isolation have only recently been addressed.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Abstract
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although less pronounced, differences in adult body size, reproductive output, and longevity also suggest that the molecular forms have adapted to distinct niches.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Abstract
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Divergence in adult mating behavior involves spatial swarm segregation and within-swarm mate recognition but they appear to play different roles in promoting reproductive isolation in Burkina Faso and Mali.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Introduction
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“For example, the similarity between the most important vectors An. gambiae s.s. and An. arabiensis may be a result of extensive introgression rather than closer phylogenetic relationship (Krzywinski and Besansky, 2003).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Krzywinski and Besansky, 2003 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Fixed chromosomal inversions between these species e.g., (Coluzzi and Sabatini, 1967) facilitated simpler identification of field specimens and led to important genetic and ecological discoveries.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Coluzzi and Sabatini, 1967
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These differences explain the sharp discontinuity in distribution of the molecular forms between rice fields and surrounding savanna, but they can also explain the concurrent cline between humid and arid environments due to the dependence on permanent habitats in the latter.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Presumably the similarities in larval ecology of An. arabiensis in East Africa and the M form in West Africa represent convergent evolution although the possibility of introgression cannot be ruled out (Besansky et al., 2003; Besansky et al., 1997; Coluzzi et al., 2002; Donnelly et al., 2004).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Geographical distribution patterns
What the sources say
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The geographical ranges of the M and S molecular forms are rather stable.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Notably, no postmating isolation was detected by laboratory crosses of colonies representing the chromosomal forms (Di Deco et al., 1980; Persiani, 1986) nor in crosses of F1s from naturally collected mothers representing the molecular forms from Burkina Faso (Diabate et al., 2007).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > The recognition of the molecular forms
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Di Deco et al., 1980
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Persiani, 1986
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Diabate et al., 2007 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Notably, phenotypic divergence alone may have epidemiological implications; if it changes vectorial capacity, vector’s distribution range, or its ability to withstand means of control.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Most studies have compared M and S populations in the savanna, which correspond to the Mopti (M) vs. Savanna (S); although in Mali the S form could contain an unknown fraction of Bamako.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Most studies, however, were conducted near Mali and Burkina Faso where the chromosomal forms perfectly corresponded to the molecular forms.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > The recognition of the molecular forms > What remains of the chromosomal forms?
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Comparing developmental success of the molecular forms in mixed and single form transplantation cages showed the S form outcompeted the M form in puddles (inconclusive results were obtained in rice fields).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Variation in traits of the egg and larva
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Divergent selection is fundamental to several speciation models as the underlying cause of differential fitness of genotypes in different environments which directly or indirectly promotes reproductive isolation (Schluter, 2001).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Schluter, 2001 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Notably, these Forest mosquitoes were solely of the M molecular form, suggesting that adaptation to arid environment is not only conferred by inversions.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > The recognition of the molecular forms > What remains of the chromosomal forms?
hedgedconditionalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These theoretical and empirical advances have mostly resolved the controversy and the molecular forms are now perceived as incipient species by many, if not all medical entomologists.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > The recognition of the molecular forms
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: unclear — It is unclear whether it could be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“This pattern was complicated, however, by finding both molecular forms in sympatry in the humid forest belt (della Torre et al., 2005; Wondji et al., 2002).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Geographical distribution patterns
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The geographical ranges of the M and S molecular forms are rather stable.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“An. arabiensis exhibits a higher degree of zoophily in East Africa than in West and Central Africa and is conspicuously missing (or rare) from rice fields in West Africa where the M form predominates.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Geographical distribution patterns
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The geographical ranges of the M and S molecular forms are rather stable.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“In Mali and Burkina Faso, these groups corresponded to the Mopti vs. Savanna and Bamako (Favia et al., 1997; Favia and Louis, 1999), hence the terms M and S molecular forms.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > The recognition of the molecular forms
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Favia et al., 1997 source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Favia and Louis, 1999
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Inversions have been considered the basis for the speciation in An. gambiae s.s. (Coluzzi et al., 1985; Coluzzi et al., 2002).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > The recognition of the molecular forms > What remains of the chromosomal forms?
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Over 90% of the range of the M form overlaps with that of the S form, suggesting considerable phenotypic overlap between them.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Geographical distribution patterns
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The geographical ranges of the M and S molecular forms are rather stable.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Early studies revealed a latitudinal cline in inversion frequencies with aridity combined with corresponding seasonal fluctuations in inversion frequencies (Coluzzi et al., 1985; Toure et al., 1994; Toure et al., 1998), providing solid ground for the role of selection on inversions.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > The recognition of the molecular forms > What remains of the chromosomal forms?
What the sources say
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, disconnected from the molecular forms, the chromosomal forms do not correspond to genetically distinct populations based on currently available data. Instead, they appear to represent conspecific populations subject to different selection pressures with different frequencies of inversion “alleles”.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > The recognition of the molecular forms > What remains of the chromosomal forms?
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No studies compared S populations from West and East Africa, so generalization should be considered cautiously.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Three important features are apparent from examination of this schematic map: (i) extensive overlap in geographical range, (ii) boundaries incompatible with known bio-geographical factors, and (iii) substantial variation in range’s size.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Geographical distribution patterns
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The geographical ranges of the M and S molecular forms are rather stable.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The form composition flips from one extreme to the other, along few kilometers, indicating strong selective force related to larval habitats.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Variation in traits of the egg and larva
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Even in areas where both forms coexist, the M form predominates in arid habitats at higher latitudes (annual precipitations <1000 mm and evapotranspiration >2000 mm) whilst the S form predominates in humid lower latitudes (annual precipitations >1000 mm and evapotranspiration <1800 mm) (Bayoh et al., 2001; della Torre et al., 2001; della Torre et al., 2005).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Geographical distribution patterns
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The geographical ranges of the M and S molecular forms are rather stable.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Phenotypic variation may depend on the karyotype (see above), thus differences between Forest-M and Mopti populations would be larger than between two Forest-M populations.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The larva (and egg) of An. gambiae experiences distinct ecological settings from the adult, and accordingly, such assessment requires examination of phenotypic variation between the molecular forms at all life stages (Table 1).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Inversion frequencies were strongly correlated with aridity on spatial and temporal scales (Coluzzi et al., 1985; Coluzzi et al., 1979; Toure et al., 1994), indicating that selection had a key role in shaping inversion frequencies, hence it confounds assessment of genetic isolation between forms.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > The recognition of the molecular forms
What the sources say
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“This correspondence, however, did not hold for specimens from adjacent countries (della Torre et al., 2001), for example the forest chromosomal form in Central Africa was divided into the sympatric molecular forms and no M/S hybrids were found (Lehmann et al., 2003; Wondji et al., 2002).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > The recognition of the molecular forms
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In Mali, the S form swarms above bare ground, whereas the M form swarms above markers consisting of a dark center in a lighter background such as a well (Diabate et al. unpublished).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Mating behaviour and reproductive isolation between the molecular forms
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Diabate et al. unpublished
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Moreover, a negative relationship between predator avoidance capacity and competitive ability was detected in container mosquitoes Aedes albopoictus and Ochlerotatus triseriatus (Kesavaraju et al., 2007a).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Variation in traits of the egg and larva
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Kesavaraju et al., 2007a
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“A preliminary study of cuticular hydrocarbons detected differences between chromosomal forms (Milligan et al. 1993), suggesting that olfaction is key to mate recognition.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Mating behaviour and reproductive isolation between the molecular forms
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Milligan et al. 1993 source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Due to their direct impact on fitness, divergence in life history traits may accompany speciation reflecting the different conditions of the niches occupied by each species (McKinnon et al., 2004).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Life history and vectorial capacity traits in adults
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites McKinnon et al., 2004 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Predation and competition also mediated divergent selection resulting in adaptive radiation in Timema stick insects (Nosil and Crespi, 2006a; Nosil and Crespi, 2006b) and indirectly, predation promotes premating isolation (Nosil 2004) in walking-sticks.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Variation in traits of the egg and larva
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Nosil 2004 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Despite its slower developmental time forcing it to endure larval predators longer, the M form possesses a superior predator avoidance ability, the nature of which remains to be identified.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Variation in traits of the egg and larva
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These studies explain the habitat segregation between rice fields and surrounding savanna based on the superior competitive power of the S form larvae in temporary habitats with low predation pressure, whereas the superior predator avoidance of the M form allows it to dominate in predator-rich larval habitats.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Variation in traits of the egg and larva
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Predation and competition also mediated divergent selection resulting in adaptive radiation in Timema stick insects (Nosil and Crespi, 2006a; Nosil and Crespi, 2006b) and indirectly, predation promotes premating isolation (Nosil 2004) in walking-sticks.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Variation in traits of the egg and larva
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Nosil and Crespi, 2006a
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Nosil and Crespi, 2006b
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Mosquitoes exhibit various behavioural responses to avoid larval predators (Blaustein et al., 2004; Kesavaraju et al., 2007b).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Variation in traits of the egg and larva
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Blaustein et al., 2004 source
- Not matchedcites Kesavaraju et al., 2007b
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Cross mating (1.2%) was considerably lower than expected by chance (17%).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Mating behaviour and reproductive isolation between the molecular forms
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Tripet et al. 2001 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“These results are consistent with previous studies showing that the length of hydroperiod in freshwater bodies mediates divergent selection in a number of species (Williams, 2006).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Variation in traits of the egg and larva
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Williams, 2006
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Coluzzi and others (2002) hypothesized that adaptation to different larval habitats was key to speciation in An. gambiae complex as exemplified by three independent speciation events that resulted in salty-water (brackish) tolerant species: An. melas, An. merus, and An. bwambae.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > The ecological factors that promoted divergence
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Coluzzi and others (2002)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgeddirect- Asserted: fails — The authors may not put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Because larval habitats in arid climate tend to be more permanent (as rain is too rare to sustain populations), the capacity of the M form to exploit such larval habitat explains its extended distribution into dryer environment.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Variation in traits of the egg and larva
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Importantly, cross mating between the molecular forms occurred indoors as much as mating between members of the same form (Dao et al., 2008), indicating that chemical cues such as pheromones and cuticular hydrocarbons do not play a major role in form recognition, unless such signals are only released or perceived during swarming.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Mating behaviour and reproductive isolation between the molecular forms
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In East Africa, Marchand (1984) reported mixed swarms between An. gambiae and An. arabiensis suggesting that mate recognition within swarms is widespread.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Phenotypic divergence between the molecular forms > Mating behaviour and reproductive isolation between the molecular forms
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Marchand (1984) source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Mutations accumulating in such isolated population may have modified mating behaviour.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > How did mate preference evolve?
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Many larval sites remain wet for several weeks and will harbor intermediate predator community (Williams, 2006), possibly allowing more equal success of both forms as suggested by high frequency of larval sites shared by both forms.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > The ecological factors that promoted divergence
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Williams, 2006
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The molecular forms represent a promising opportunity to uncover adaptive variation, although local adaptation presumably exists within each form.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > Adaptive variation in An. gambiae
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Increasing divergence with time is most plausible, but since fusion and fission are possible and depend on ecological conditions, divergence may remain the same for long or even decrease.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > Divergence riddles: Which form was first? When they split? What is their future?
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Coluzzi and others (2002) hypothesized that the spread of agriculture led to the speciation of An. gambiae s.s. approximately 5000 yrs ago from a zoophilic ancestor, so the molecular forms must have split even later.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > Divergence riddles: Which form was first? When they split? What is their future?
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Coluzzi and others (2002)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgeddirect- Asserted: fails — The authors may not put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These diverse vectors together increase the burden of malaria and lymphatic filariasis because they extend duration of disease transmission and its geographical range (Table 1 and Figure 1).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > Public health implications
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Positive selection was demonstrated by latitudinal and temporal clines in inversion frequencies (above) and from patterns of polymorphism and differentiation between the molecular forms operating on a “locus” on chromosome II (Turner and Hahn, 2007).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > Adaptive variation in An. gambiae
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Turner and Hahn, 2007 source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, without reinforcement and in the face of gene flow, these mechanisms may be selected against rather quickly within form (between genotypes with adaptations to the same habitat) or spread rapidly within form due to their advantage in preventing cross mating between forms.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > How did mate preference evolve?
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“It is also compatible with finding a third speciation island (on chromosome 2R) separating the molecular forms from Cameroon but not from Mali (Turner et al. 2007).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > How did mate preference evolve?
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Turner et al. 2007 source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, such surveys did not quantify the success of the forms in different habitats and did not estimate form and species relative abundance.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > The ecological factors that promoted divergence
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Ecological speciation against hybrids has been shown in a few divergent species such as threespine sticklebacks and butterfly Heliconius erato (Hatfield and Schluter, 1999, Mallet et al. 1998).”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > The ecological factors that promoted divergence
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Larval control methods might have a greater success in the fewer, larger, and predictable sites of the M form, but no such strategies are widely implemented.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > Public health implications
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Indirectly, this compartmentalized vectorial system is far more robust given its higher capacity to adapt because of the high total effective population size and subdivision coupled with introgression (Mallet, 2005), leading to the spread of adaptive genes between “compartments”.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > Public health implications
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Mallet, 2005 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“In both cases, hybrids were viable in the laboratory, but showed lower fitness in natural conditions.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > The ecological factors that promoted divergence
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“That An. arabiensis in East Africa occupies (what appears to be) the “exact” niche filled by the M form in West Africa, suggests the same process operated in both cases, resulting in convergent evolution.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > The ecological factors that promoted divergence
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Future prospects for disease control is reduced not only because of the forms different susceptibility to insecticides but also because reproductive isolation will limit effectiveness of control strategies based on sterile male release or the spread of genetically engineered constructs reducing transmission (Benedict and Robinson, 2003), unless these populations are targeted simultaneously.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > Public health implications
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Benedict and Robinson, 2003
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The behavioral, physiological, and morphological adaptations that allow populations of An. gambiae to occupy diverse environments across Africa are mostly unknown.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > Adaptive variation in An. gambiae
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Finally, variation in hydroperiod of natural larval sites existed regardless of man, hence its role in divergence does not support this hypothesis.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > Divergence riddles: Which form was first? When they split? What is their future?
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Accordingly, isolation of diverging populations as described above occurred repeatedly and independent mechanisms facilitating assortative mating have evolved and are possibly spreading.”
§ The molecular forms of Anopheles gambiae: A phenotypic perspective > Discussion > How did mate preference evolve?
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The authors state this as an assumption.
The geographical ranges of the M and S molecular forms are rather stable.
“hence we assume their ranges are rather stable (Figure 1).”
The paper relies on this without support.
Longevity and reproductive output have a strong influence on vectorial capacity.
“Notably, life history traits such as longevity and reproductive output strongly affect vectorial capacity.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Small changes in mosquito longevity produce large changes in vectorial capacity.
“Such variation in longevity between the forms could be of epidemiological importance because slight changes in longevity greatly change vectorial capacity.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Predator abundance is much higher in permanent larval habitats than in temporary ones.
“Predators are much more abundant in permanent larval habitats.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Divergent natural selection primarily targets ecologically important traits, not mate-selection traits.
“Divergent natural selection acts on ecologically important traits rather than on mate selection.”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source doesn’t support the claim as written.
In the citing paper
“Different mosquito larval surveys in West and Central Africa observed variations in the breeding habitat choices of An. coluzzii and An. gambiae s.s. (reviewed in [6]).”
From Sibling species of the major malaria vector Anopheles gambiae display divergent preferences for aquatic breeding sites in southern Nigeria (2024) · cites this paper as [6]
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Anopheles gambiae s.s. have the behaviour of ovipositing in temporary, rain-dependent, small water collections such as puddles and hoof-prints [6].”
From Sibling species of the major malaria vector Anopheles gambiae display divergent preferences for aquatic breeding sites in southern Nigeria (2024) · cites this paper as [6]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Some of these biological factors, for example the presence of predators, have been shown in previous studies to affect Anopheles larvae in aquatic environments (reviewed in [6, 75].”
From Sibling species of the major malaria vector Anopheles gambiae display divergent preferences for aquatic breeding sites in southern Nigeria (2024) · cites this paper as [6]
Citations
Cites
Hybridization as an invasion of the genome
Mallet, J. (2005) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2005.02.010 · Cited by 2,196 · cited 2×
“ndirectly, this compartmentalized vectorial system is far more st given its higher capacity to adapt because of the high total tive population size and subdivision coupled with introgres(Mallet, 2005), leading to the spread of adaptive genes een ‘‘compartments’’.”
Ecology and the origin of species
Schluter, D. (2001) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/s0169-5347(01)02198-x · Cited by 1,878 · cited 4×
“Divergent selection is fundamental to several speciation models as the underlying cause of differential fitness of genotypes in different environments which directly or indirectly promotes reproductive isolation (Schluter, 2001).”
InfluentialPATTERNS OF SPECIATION IN DROSOPHILA
Coyne, J. A., & Orr, H. A. (1989) · Evolution · doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.1989.tb04233.x · Cited by 1,460 · cited 2×
“The study of closely related spe and incipient species has been central for the current und standing of speciation (Coyne and Orr, 1997; Grant and Gr 1979; Mallet, 2006; Wu and Ting, 2004), but many of its asp remain unclear if not enigmatic.”
The genic view of the process of speciation
Wu, C. (2001) · Journal of Evolutionary Biology · doi:10.1046/j.1420-9101.2001.00335.x · Cited by 1,289
Host races in plant–feeding insects and their importance in sympatric speciation
Drès, M., & Mallet, J. (2002) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2002.1059 · Cited by 910
“PATTERNS OF SPECIATION INDROSOPHILA” REVISITED
Coyne, J. A., & Orr, H. A. (1997) · Evolution · doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.1997.tb02412.x · Cited by 753 · cited 1×
“From disease transmission surveillance and rol perspectives, the epidemiological importance of the ivision of A. gambiae into molecular forms is modest or even as argued by Curtis (2000).”
Chromosomal differentiation and adaptation to human environments in the Anopheles gambiae complex
Coluzzi, M., Sabatini, A., Petrarca, V., & Di Deco, M. A. (1979) · Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene · doi:10.1016/0035-9203(79)90036-1 · Cited by 737
Genomic islands of speciation in Anopheles gambiae
Turner, T. L., Hahn, M. W., & Nuzhdin, S. V. (2005) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0030285 · Cited by 734 · cited 2×
“…limiting interpretation of the wealth of gen information that has been accumulating over recent years ( Ribeiro et al., 2004; Stump et al., 2005; Turner et al., 2005 central challenge to extend understanding of phenotypic va tion is the measurement of fitness (or its key components), un natural…”
Natural Selection and Parallel Speciation in Sympatric Sticklebacks
Rundle, H. D., Nagel, L., BOUGHMAN, J. W., & Schluter, D. (2000) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.287.5451.306 · Cited by 705 · cited 1×
“However, if these traits also affect mate choice, directly or indirectly, then reproductive isolation could evolve as a by-product of local adaptation (Rundle et al., 2000, 2005, Rice and Hostert, 1993, Dodd, 1989, Schluter, 2000, Nosil et al., 2002).”
The Biology of Temporary Waters
Williams, D. D. (2005) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198528128.001.0001 · Cited by 561
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Di Deco, 1980, Polimorphismo cromosomico da inversioni paracentriche ed eccesso degli eterocariotipi in ceppi di Anopheles allevati in laboaratorio, Parassitologia, 22, 304
- Persiani, 1986, Osservazioni di laboratorio su polimorfismi da inversione originata da incrocitra popolazioni diverse de Anopheles gambiae s.s, Ann. Istit. Super Sanita, 22, 221
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Anopheles coluzzii and Anopheles amharicus, new members of the Anopheles gambiae complex
Coetzee, M., Hunt, R. H., Wilkerson, R. C., della Torre, A., Coulibaly, M. B., & Besansky, N. J. (2013) · Zootaxa · doi:10.11646/zootaxa.3619.3.2 · Cited by 562
The coupling hypothesis: why genome scans may fail to map local adaptation genes
Bierne, N., Welch, J. J., Loire, É., Bonhomme, F., & David, P. (2011) · Molecular Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-294x.2011.05080.x · Cited by 548
“Extensive molecular analyses attempted to further distinguish the number of isolated or semi-isolated gene pools that exist in A. gambiae s.s., but demonstrated the existence of only two different entities, now referred to as molecular forms M and S (della Torre et al. 2001; Lehmann & Diabate 2008).”
BackgroundSimard, F., Ayala, D., Kamdem, G. C., Pombi, M., Etouna, J., Osé, K., Fotsing, J.-M., Fontenille, D., Besansky, N. J., & Costantini, C. (2009) · BMC Ecology · doi:10.1186/1472-6785-9-17 · Cited by 268
“In Mali and Burkina Faso, where M and S are found in sympatry, stable between-form differences in chromosomal inversion frequencies are evident and both forms adopt alternative behaviors and ecological preferences [18].”
BackgroundWidespread Divergence Between Incipient Anopheles gambiae Species Revealed by Whole Genome Sequences
Lawniczak, M., Emrich, S., Holloway, A. K., Regier, A. P., Olson, M., White, B. J., Redmond, S. N., Fulton, L., Appelbaum, E. L., Godfrey, J., et al. (2010) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1195755 · Cited by 261
Costantini, C., Ayala, D., Guelbeogo, M. W., Pombi, M., Some, C. Y. S., Bassolé, I. H. N., Osé, K., Fotsing, J.-M., Sagnon, N., Fontenille, D., et al. (2009) · BMC Ecology · doi:10.1186/1472-6785-9-16 · Cited by 222
“gambiae, have been found at times to segregate in different breeding sites [23,34,35], though the ecological factors modulating larval niche partitioning remain unclear [36].”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Lehmann, T., & Diabate, A.
- Affiliations
- National Institutes of Health (US)
- Corresponding author
- Lehmann, Tovi
- ORCID
- Lehmann, Tovi
- Venue
- Infection, Genetics and Evolution
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2008-09
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 737-746
- ISSN
- 1567-1348 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC2731232
- OpenAlex
- W1983813938
- Cited by
- 177
- References
- 111
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 16
- FWCI
- 1.81
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Infection Genetics and Evolution (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (Z99 AI999999)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Malaria Research and Control
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic diversity and population structure
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Diptera species taxonomy and behavior
- Keywords
- Anopheles gambiae, M and S molecular forms, speciation, phenotypic divergence, larval predation, larval competition, freshwater habitats, paddy fields, reproductive isolation, adult body size, reproductive output, mosquito longevity, malaria vectors, disease transmission, vector control
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Anopheles, Humans, Insect Vectors, Phenotype, Selection, Genetic
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-09-28, under version 3 of the claim definition (prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-09-28 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
