ライフサイエンスコーパス: microevolutionary

1 This microevolutionary adaptation is produced by a genetic el

2 Here, we show rapid microevolutionary adaptation of a harmful cyanobacterium

3 tive use of microsatellite loci as tools for microevolutionary analysis requires knowledge of the fac

4 Populations may thus face a microevolutionary and gene flow challenge to advance fir

5 le studies means that the connection between microevolutionary and macroevolutionary events is poorly

6 l lineages, providing a crucial link between microevolutionary and macroevolutionary explanations of

7 findings allow more rigorous comparisons of microevolutionary and macroevolutionary patterns and pro

8 The model exhibits a wide variety of microevolutionary and macroevolutionary phenomena which

9 nessential genes over both relatively short (microevolutionary) and longer (macroevolutionary) time s

10 highlight the value of using both macro- and microevolutionary approaches in studying the duplication

11 d, which would affect any predicted rates of microevolutionary change in response to sexually antagon

12 is species, and underscore the potential for microevolutionary change in this important developmental

13 d resource exploitation driving directional, microevolutionary change over thousands of years.

14 ntial knowledge gap in the iconic example of microevolutionary change, adding a further layer of insi

15 ion, speciation, and extinction, with little microevolutionary change.

16 lation assumed by many theoretical models of microevolutionary change.

17 y, and by assessing its capacity to identify microevolutionary changes both in vitro and in vivo.

18 This work demonstrates that simple microevolutionary changes can have profound macroevoluti

19 tching of C. glabrata is not associated with microevolutionary changes identified by the DNA fingerpr

20 cal invasions seldom considers phenotypic or microevolutionary changes that occur following introduct

21 o investigate adaptive processes and to time microevolutionary changes that precede macroevolutionary

22 limb size was reduced by gradually operating microevolutionary changes.

23 genetic group methods potentially allow the microevolutionary consequences of local selection to be

24 variation when making predictions about the microevolutionary consequences of selection.

25 orker body sizes in a manner consistent with microevolutionary divergence.

26 This microevolutionary dynamics is reminiscent of an ecologic

27 Such data provide a window into the microevolutionary dynamics that drive successful immune

28 n with paleolimnology enable us to associate microevolutionary dynamics with detailed information on

29 ve research has demonstrated host-retrovirus microevolutionary dynamics, it has been difficult to gai

30 life-history traits is central to predicting microevolutionary dynamics.

31 f breeding locations, impeding prediction of microevolutionary dynamics.

32 cing cyanobacteria in their diet, suggesting microevolutionary effects.

33 We describe a microevolutionary event of a prevalent strain of Mycobac

34 break of tuberculosis enabled us to identify microevolutionary events observable during transmission,

35 ghts the ability of NGS to clarify molecular microevolutionary events within antibiotic-resistant org

36 ttempts to explain macroevolution as well as microevolutionary events.

37 y divergence among genera also contribute to microevolutionary fine-tuning of adaptive traits within

38 The microevolutionary history of pspA differed from that of

39 At the microevolutionary level, the likely existence of a billi

40 uld be studied at both macroevolutionary and microevolutionary levels.

41 s, we also find that dominance can evolve by microevolutionary mechanisms and thus are able to reconc

42 rocesses involved in immune responses and of microevolutionary mechanisms that create and maintain va

43 ive results are broadly compatible with both microevolutionary models and observations from the fossi

44 present an analysis of rates and patterns of microevolutionary phenomena that have shaped the human,

45 teractions, the varying local ecologies, and microevolutionary population processes in both the bioco

46 Considering carcinogenesis as a microevolutionary process, best described in the context

47 To mechanistically characterize the microevolutionary processes active in altering transcrip

48 s are presumably more frequently involved in microevolutionary processes but have rarely been discove

49 Davidson and Erwin argued that known microevolutionary processes cannot explain the evolution

50 and, conversely, competitive release on the microevolutionary processes driving microhabitat niche e

51 Collectively, these results demonstrate that microevolutionary processes driving spatial variation in

52 of divergence help us better understand the microevolutionary processes involved in rapid phenotypic

53 y of reproductive strategies, to address the microevolutionary processes leading to phenotypic and ge

54 riving force of adaptive radiations, but how microevolutionary processes scale up to shape the expans

55 At the same time, quantitative models of the microevolutionary processes shaping microbial population

56 onsidered typical anthropogenic pressures on microevolutionary processes that are responsible for the

57 The temporal element linking microevolutionary processes to macroevolutionary pattern

58 To understand better the microevolutionary processes underlying these interspecif

59 Microevolutionary processes, including mutation, genetic

60 Unlike microevolutionary processes, little is known about the g

61 isms for interspecific competition and other microevolutionary processes, yet fully explains the shap

62 18) and elucidated the functional effect of microevolutionary processes.

63 theory) has allowed a reevaluation of these microevolutionary processes.

64 nthropogenic influences, we also explore the microevolutionary response of migratory strategies to en

65 bility to predict the pattern and process of microevolutionary responses to changing environments.

66 Quantifying and predicting microevolutionary responses to environmental change requ

67 ogical observations, recent phenological and microevolutionary responses, experiments, and computatio

68 isparate phenomena evolve by well-understood microevolutionary rules, they are also subject to the ma

69 On a microevolutionary scale, the observed large epistatic va

70 angle to questions traditionally explored at microevolutionary scale.

71 hort evolutionary trajectories, those on the microevolutionary scale.

72 In our microevolutionary selection experiments, the infectivity

73 ssed with respect to what is known about the microevolutionary signatures that result from these proc

74 their own than adjust their life history by microevolutionary steps.

75 Some of these transitions occurred on microevolutionary timescales, indicating that HOX gene e

76 utations that are overlooked by conventional microevolutionary tools.

77 This unexpected microevolutionary trend is explained by genetic linkage

78 In order to explore microevolutionary trends in bacteria and archaea, we con

79 ctive relationships per se in accounting for microevolutionary unities and discontinuities in sexuall

80 particularly useful system for studying (i) microevolutionary variation in natural populations, and

81 As such, each ATGC is suited for analysis of microevolutionary variations within a cohesive group of