1992
DOI: 10.1093/icb/32.2.276
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Reflections on the Evolution of Piscine Viviparity

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

6
217
0
5

Year Published

1998
1998
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 216 publications
(228 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
6
217
0
5
Order By: Relevance
“…We used a simple binary categorisation of reproductive mode into lecithotrophy and matrotrophy, which does not account for variation in the degree of maternal investment among species (Wourms and Lombardi 1992). One way of measuring the degree of relative investment in offspring is to consider the relative mass increase between ovum and neonate size.…”
Section: Life-history Strategies and Relative Investmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We used a simple binary categorisation of reproductive mode into lecithotrophy and matrotrophy, which does not account for variation in the degree of maternal investment among species (Wourms and Lombardi 1992). One way of measuring the degree of relative investment in offspring is to consider the relative mass increase between ovum and neonate size.…”
Section: Life-history Strategies and Relative Investmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Reproduction within the genus Scorpaena is characterised by external fertilisation and production of eggs that are embedded in a gelatinous matrix (Wourms and Lombardi 1992;Koya and Muñoz 2007;McMillan 2007). Findings from the present study suggest that S. cardinalis has a similar reproductive strategy.…”
Section: Reproductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Reproduction within the genus Scorpaena has previously been described as highly specialised, with the oviparous species examined (S. porcus, S. guttata, S. miostoma and S. notata) producing floating gelatinous egg masses (Koya and Muñoz 2007). This reproductive mode is thought to represent a shift from a primitive to specialised mode of oviparity (Wourms and Lombardi 1992) and has been used to infer evolution within the larger family Scorpaenidae (Koya and Muñoz 2007).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The main disadvantage of internal embryonic development is the increased costs of reproduction per individual offspring for the female. Females suffer reduced fecundity and might even face higher predation pressure due to lower mobility during pregnancy 40,41 . In coelacanths, the benefits of live-bearing seem to compensate the large disadvantages to the female.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%