The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Effective population size/adult population size ratios in wildlife: a review
Open accessAbstract
Summary: The effective population size is required to predict the rate of inbreeding and loss of genetic variation in wildlife. Since only census population size is normally available, it is critical to know the ratio of effective to actual population size (N e/N). Published estimates of N e/N(192 from 102 species) were analysed to identify major variables affecting the ratio, and to obtain a comprehensive estimate of the ratio with all relevant variables included. The five most important variables explaining variation among estimates, in order of importance, were fluctuation in population size, variance in family size, form of N used (adults υ. breeders υ. total size), taxonomic group and unequal sex-ratio. There were no significant effects on the ratio of high υ. low fecundity, demographic υ. genetic methods of estimation, or of overlapping υ. non-overlapping generations when the same variables were included in estimates. Comprehensive estimates of N e/N(that included the effects of fluctuation in population size, variance in family size and unequal sex-ratio) averaged only 0·10–0·11. Wildlife populations have much smaller effective population sizes than previously recognized.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Effective deme sizes during long-term evolution estimated from rates of chromosomal rearrangement
Lande, R. (1979) · Evolution · doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.1979.tb04678.x · Cited by 792
Cited by
A Meta-Analysis of Local Adaptation in Plants
Leimu, R., & Fischer, M. (2008) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0004010 · Cited by 1,155
Kawecki, T. J., Lenski, R. E., Ebert, D., Hollis, B., Olivieri, I., & Whitlock, M. C. (2012) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2012.06.001 · Cited by 807
Reliability of genetic bottleneck tests for detecting recent population declines
PEERY, M. Z., KIRBY, R., REID, B. N., STOELTING, R., DOUCET‐BËER, E., ROBINSON, S., VÁSQUEZ‐CARRILLO, C., PAULI, J. N., & PALSBØLL, P. J. (2012) · Molecular Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-294x.2012.05635.x · Cited by 578
Genetic erosion impedes adaptive responses to stressful environments
Bijlsma, R., & Loeschcke, V. (2012) · Evolutionary Applications · doi:10.1111/j.1752-4571.2011.00214.x · Cited by 345
Nosil, P., & Crespi, B. J. (2004) · Evolution · doi:10.1111/j.0014-3820.2004.tb01577.x · Cited by 220
Metadata
- Authors
- Frankham, R.
- Venue
- Genetical Research
- Publisher
- Hindawi Limited
- Published
- 1995-10
- Volume
- 66
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 95-107
- ISSN
- 0016-6723 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-5073
- OpenAlex
- W4241659171
- Cited by
- 1,370
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 5.07
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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.
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.