The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
CAN INTRASPECIFIC COMPETITION DRIVE DISRUPTIVE SELECTION? AN EXPERIMENTAL TEST IN NATURAL POPULATIONS OF STICKLEBACKS
Abstract
Theory suggests that frequency-dependent resource competition will disproportionately impact the most common phenotypes in a population. The resulting disruptive selection forms the driving force behind evolutionary models of niche diversification, character release, ecological sexual dimorphism, resource polymorphism, and sympatric speciation. However, there is little empirical support for the idea that intraspecific competition generates disruptive selection. This paper presents a test of this theory, using natural populations of the three-spine stickleback, Gasterosteus aculeatus. Sticklebacks exhibit substantial individual specialization associated with phenotypic variation and so are likely to experience frequency-dependent competition and hence disruptive selection. Using body size and relative gonad mass as indirect measures of potential fecundity and hence fitness, I show that an important aspect of trophic morphology, gill raker length, is subject to disruptive selection in one of two natural lake populations. To test whether this apparent disruptive selection could have been caused by competition, I manipulated population densities in pairs of large enclosures in each of five lakes. In each lake I removed fish from one enclosure and added them to the other to create paired low- and high-population-density treatments with natural phenotype distributions. Again using indirect measures of fitness, disruptive selection was consistently stronger in high-density than low-density enclosures. These results support long-standing theoretical arguments that intraspecific competition drives disruptive selection and thus may be an important causal agent in the evolution of ecological variation.
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
Mayr, E. (1963) · doi:10.4159/harvard.9780674865327 · Cited by 10,175
The measurement of selection on correlated characters
Lande, R., & Arnold, S. J. (1983) · Evolution · doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.1983.tb00236.x · Cited by 5,437
The Ecology of Adaptive Radiation
Schluter, D. (2000) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198505235.001.0001 · Cited by 4,974
Cited by
Character Displacement: Ecological And Reproductive Responses To A Common Evolutionary Problem
Pfennig, K. S., & Pfennig, D. W. (2009) · The Quarterly Review of Biology · doi:10.1086/605079 · Cited by 432
Metadata
- Authors
- Bolnick, D. I.
- Venue
- Evolution
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2004-03
- Volume
- 58
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 608-618
- ISSN
- 0014-3820 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-5646
- OpenAlex
- W2159657431
- Cited by
- 308
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 19.88
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: CAN INTRASPECIFIC COMPETITION DRIVE DISRUPTIVE SELECTION? AN EXPERIMENTAL TEST IN NATURAL POPULATIONS OF STICKLEBACKS. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.0014-3820.2004.tb01683.x
- The paper
- Bolnick, D. I. (2004). CAN INTRASPECIFIC COMPETITION DRIVE DISRUPTIVE SELECTION? AN EXPERIMENTAL TEST IN NATURAL POPULATIONS OF STICKLEBACKS. Evolution. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0014-3820.2004.tb01683.x
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.