The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Founder-effect speciation theory: failure of experimental corroboration
Open accessAbstract
The theory of founder-effect speciation proposes that colonization by very few individuals of an empty habitat favors rapid genetic changes and the evolution of a new species. We report here the results obtained in a 10-year-long and large-scale experiment with Drosophila pseudoobscura designed to test the theory. In our experimental protocol, populations are established with variable numbers of very few individuals and allowed to expand greatly for several generations until conditions of severe competition for resources are reached and the population crashes. A few random survivors are then taken to start a new population expansion and thus initiate a new cycle of founding events, population flushes, and crashes. Our results provide no support for the theories proposing that new species are very likely to appear as by-products of founder events.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“Also, studies using experimental populations offered limited evidence that RI could arise as a by-product of population bottlenecks (e.g., Moya et al., 1995; Rundle et al., 1998).”
From Genomics of plant speciation (2023) · cites this paper as Moya et al., 1995
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
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
Bock, D. G., Cai, Z., Elphinstone, C., González-Segovia, E., Hirabayashi, K., Huang, K., Keais, G. L., Kim, A., Owens, G. L., & Rieseberg, L. H. (2023) · Plant Communications · doi:10.1016/j.xplc.2023.100599 · Cited by 84
“Also, studies using experimental populations offered limited evidence that RI could arise as a by-product of population bottlenecks (e.g., Moya et al., 1995; Rundle et al., 1998).”
Metadata
- Authors
- Moya, A., Galiana, A., & Ayala, F. J.
- Affiliations
- Departamento de Genètica, Universitat de València, Burjasot, Spain.
- Universitat de València (ES)
- ORCID
- Ayala, F J
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Publisher
- National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 1995-04-25
- Volume
- 92
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 3983-3986
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- PMC
- PMC42086
- OpenAlex
- W1965486362
- Cited by
- 48
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 0.83
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (5p01gm042397-05)
- National Institute of General Medical Sciences (GM 42397)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Evolution and Genetic Dynamics
- Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Evolution and Paleontology Studies
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic diversity and population structure
- Keywords
- founder effect, speciation, Drosophila pseudoobscura, experimental evolution, population collapse, genetic alterations
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Crosses, Genetic, Drosophila, Biological Evolution, Female, Genetics, Population, Male, Models, Biological, Recombination, Genetic, Reproduction
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
