2007
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2435.2007.01335.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Gravity still matters

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The gravity hypothesis has recently been sharply disputed by Brandt & Andrade (2007a,b), and stoutly defended by its proposers (Moya‐Laraño et al. 2007a).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The gravity hypothesis has recently been sharply disputed by Brandt & Andrade (2007a,b), and stoutly defended by its proposers (Moya‐Laraño et al. 2007a).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…, 2007), intermediate‐sized males were favoured (Vollrath, 1980) and even large males had an advantage (Foellmer & Fairbairn, 2005). Brandt & Andrade (2007a) questioned the validity of the model underlying the GH; however, the alternative model they presented has since been shown to be flawed and unable to describe biological processes (Brandt & Andrade, 2007b; Moya‐Laraño et al. , 2007a).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…find females first) have yielded mixed results: small males were favoured (Linn, 2001), no size effects were detected (Andrade, 2003;Foellmer & Fairbairn, 2005;Brandt & Andrade, 2007a;Kasumovic et al, 2007), intermediate-sized males were favoured (Vollrath, 1980) and even large males had an advantage (Foellmer & Fairbairn, 2005). Brandt & Andrade (2007a) questioned the validity of the model underlying the GH; however, the alternative model they presented has since been shown to be flawed and unable to describe biological processes (Brandt & Andrade, 2007b;Moya-Larañ o et al, 2007a). Moya-Larañ o et al (2007b) tested for a difference in climbing speed between male and female Leucauge venusta to overcome the inherent limitation of studies that include only naturally occurring size variation among males, namely that phenotypes at the ends of the size distribution may be rare and rapidly eliminated from the population by selection.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although this hypothesis has been recently criticized (Brandt & Andrade, 2007a,b), additional evidence strongly suggests that although the relationship between climbing speed and body size is complex (i.e. positive below certain body size threshold and negative beyond the threshold), the gravity hypothesis can still accurately explain the evolution of extreme SSD (Foellmer & Moya‐Laraño, 2007; Moya‐Laraño et al. , 2007a,b, 2009).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although this hypothesis has been recently criticized (Brandt & Andrade, 2007a,b), additional evidence strongly suggests that although the relationship between climbing speed and body size is complex (i.e. positive below certain body size threshold and negative beyond the threshold), the gravity hypothesis can still accurately explain the evolution of extreme SSD (Foellmer & Moya-Larañ o, 2007;Moya-Larañ o et al, 2007a,b, 2009). Furthermore, fecundity selection is likely a strong force behind the evolution of large female body size and can still contribute to the evolution of SSD (Head, 1995;Coddington et al, 1997;Prenter et al, 1999).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%