Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 332

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Do population size bottlenecks reduce evolutionary potential?

Frankham, Richard, Lees, Kelly, Montgomery, Margaret E., England, Phillip R., Lowe, Edwin H., Briscoe, David A.·1999·Animal Conservation

Abstract

Abstract Single locus neutralist models predict that population size bottlenecks will reduce genetic variation and increase inbreeding, thereby reducing evolutionary potential. However, experimental evaluations of the effects of bottlenecks on quantitative genetic variation do not always follow predictions, especially for characters related to reproductive fitness. Populations of Drosophila melanogaster were subjected to population bottlenecks of a single pair for one or three generations, and their ability to tolerate increasing concentrations of NaCl was compared with those of their outbred base populations, and related highly inbred lines. Bottlenecked populations became extinct at significantly lower concentrations of NaCl than their non‐bottlenecked base populations. Population bottlenecks should be avoided in managing species of conservation concern.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s136794309900058x

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Frankham, R., Lees, K., Montgomery, M. E., England, P. R., Lowe, E. H., & Briscoe, D. A.
Venue
Animal Conservation
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1999-11
Volume
2
Issue
4
Pages
255-260
ISSN
1367-9430 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2112060747
Cited by
332
References
0
FWCI
1.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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.