The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
REGRESSION ANALYSIS OF NATURAL SELECTION: STATISTICAL INFERENCE AND BIOLOGICAL INTERPRETATION
Open accessAbstract
Recent theoretical work in quantitative genetics has fueled interest in measuring natural selection in the wild. We discuss statistical and biological issues that may arise in applications of Lande and Arnold's (1983) multiple-regression approach to measuring selection. We review assumptions involved in estimation and hypothesis testing in regression problems, and we note difficulties that frequently arise as a result of violation of these assumptions. In particular, multicollinearity (extreme intercorrelation of characters) and extrinsic, unmeasured factors affecting fitness may seriously complicate inference regarding selection. Further, violation of the assumption that residuals are normally distributed vitiates tests of significance. For this situation, we suggest applications of recently developed jackknife tests of significance. While fitness regression permits direct assessment of selection in a form suitable for predicting selection response, we suggest that the aim of inferring causal relationships about the effects of phenotypic characters on fitness is greatly facilitated by manipulative experiments. Finally, we discuss alternative definitions of stabilizing and disruptive selection.
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
The Jackknife, the Bootstrap and Other Resampling Plans
Efron, B. (1982) · Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics eBooks · doi:10.1137/1.9781611970319 · Cited by 8,120
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
QUANTITATIVE GENETIC ANALYSIS OF MULTIVARIATE EVOLUTION, APPLIED TO BRAIN:BODY SIZE ALLOMETRY
Lande, R. (1979) · Evolution · doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.1979.tb04694.x · Cited by 2,648
Cited by
WHAT IS THE OBSERVED RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SPECIES RICHNESS AND PRODUCTIVITY?
Mittelbach, G. G., Steiner, C. F., Scheiner, S. M., Gross, K. L., Reynolds, H. L., Waide, R. B., Willig, M. R., Dodson, S. I., & Gough, L. (2001) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/0012-9658(2001)082[2381:witorb]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 1,650
Community Assembly, Niche Conservatism, and Adaptive Evolution in Changing Environments
Ackerly, D. D. (2003) · International Journal of Plant Sciences · doi:10.1086/368401 · Cited by 893
Spatial scale dictates the productivity–biodiversity relationship
Chase, J. M., & Leibold, M. A. (2002) · Nature · doi:10.1038/416427a · Cited by 816
THE RELATIONSHIP IN LAKE COMMUNITIES BETWEEN PRIMARY PRODUCTIVITY AND SPECIES RICHNESS
Dodson, S. I., Arnott, S. E., & Cottingham, K. L. (2000) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/0012-9658(2000)081[2662:trilcb]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 577
THE DIVERSITY–DISTURBANCE RELATIONSHIP: IS IT GENERALLY STRONG AND PEAKED?
Mackey, R. L., & Currie, D. J. (2001) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/0012-9658(2001)082[3479:tddrii]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 555
Metadata
- Authors
- Mitchell‐Olds, T., & Shaw, R. G.
- Venue
- Evolution
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1987-11
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1149-1161
- ISSN
- 0014-3820 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-5646
- OpenAlex
- W2051004220
- Cited by
- 866
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 30.32
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: REGRESSION ANALYSIS OF NATURAL SELECTION: STATISTICAL INFERENCE AND BIOLOGICAL INTERPRETATION. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1558-5646.1987.tb02457.x
- The paper
- Mitchell‐Olds, T., & Shaw, R. G. (1987). REGRESSION ANALYSIS OF NATURAL SELECTION: STATISTICAL INFERENCE AND BIOLOGICAL INTERPRETATION. Evolution. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.1987.tb02457.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.
