ライフサイエンスコーパス: microevolutionary

1 associated microbiomes influence patterns of microevolutionary adaptation in plants and animals.

2 This microevolutionary adaptation is produced by a genetic el

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

4 us, we document a highly polygenic heritable microevolutionary adaptive change over a single generati

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

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

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

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

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

10 arch avenues, emphasizing the integration of microevolutionary and macroevolutionary perspectives.

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

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

13 ricts the potential for adaptive phenotypic, microevolutionary, and population dynamic responses to c

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

15 ponse in L. fasciculata and the oldest known microevolutionary arms race between predator and prey.

16 able because it reveals the genetic basis of microevolutionary change across many more generations th

17 Our results show that microevolutionary change in a wild population is charact

18 (directional, episodic, and balancing) drive microevolutionary change in correlated traits over time.

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

20 ose a conceptual framework that explores how microevolutionary change in the elemental phenotype occu

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

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

23 nts the most highly resolved evidence yet of microevolutionary change within an early hominin species

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

25 iple mutualisms extends to key components of microevolutionary change, emphasising the importance of

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

27 lation assumed by many theoretical models of microevolutionary change.

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

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

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

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

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

33 hich are more than an accumulation of steady microevolutionary changes.

34 limb size was reduced by gradually operating microevolutionary changes.

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

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

37 sses have not been studied and linked in the microevolutionary context of breeding for improved disea

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

39 This microevolutionary dynamics is reminiscent of an ecologic

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

41 efore to build a synthesis to understand how microevolutionary dynamics unfold over millions of years

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

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

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

45 f breeding locations, impeding prediction of microevolutionary dynamics.

46 cing cyanobacteria in their diet, suggesting microevolutionary effects.

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

48 p to understanding the significance of these microevolutionary events and their impact on the genome

49 ification of the brown algal orders, down to microevolutionary events at the genus level.

50 outbreak strain relatedness and characterise microevolutionary events in the accessory genomes of a c

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

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

53 ttempts to explain macroevolution as well as microevolutionary events.

54 However, even with an explosion of microevolutionary field studies over the past four decad

55 Overall, these macro- and microevolutionary findings demonstrate that organisms pr

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

57 ore complex interaction of environmental and microevolutionary forces.

58 Among fishes, well-known examples include microevolutionary habitat transitions into the water col

59 The microevolutionary history of pspA differed from that of

60 Our results provide macroevolutionary and microevolutionary insights into a model species originat

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

62 uld be studied at both macroevolutionary and microevolutionary levels.

63 These results provide a microevolutionary mechanism for the long-term persistenc

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

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

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

67 It is unknown, however, how these microevolutionary patterns translate to a macroevolution

68 gillus minisclerotigenes and discuss how the microevolutionary patterns we uncover inform macroevolut

69 arasite natural history and its influence on microevolutionary patterns, including contributions to z

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

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

72 re deep sequenced to elucidate the intrahost microevolutionary process after a single transmission ev

73 studies of extant taxa, thereby integrating microevolutionary process and macroevolutionary pattern.

74 We reveal the microevolutionary process underlying speciation: Hosts r

75 cs to better link macroevolutionary pattern, microevolutionary process, and molecular mechanisms.

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

77 experiment, we test the role of an important microevolutionary process-the propensity for population

78 This expectation implicitly links microevolutionary processes (the evolution of population

79 r-level patterns of divergence arise through microevolutionary processes acting within populations.

80 To mechanistically characterize the microevolutionary processes active in altering transcrip

81 how a narrow latitudinal gradient can shape microevolutionary processes and contribute to broader sc

82 Here, we test whether microevolutionary processes are linked to environmental

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

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

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

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

87 ture in sympatric An. cruzii populations and microevolutionary processes driving these populations.

88 Our work establishes how changes in microevolutionary processes impact changes in molecular

89 erii Our overall goal is to precisely assess microevolutionary processes in the clade to ascertain mo

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

91 Although the role of gene regulation in microevolutionary processes is gaining wide acceptance,

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

93 species raise questions about how macro- and microevolutionary processes made the genus Quercus an ev

94 he most thorough descriptions to date of how microevolutionary processes result in trait change in a

95 Variation in microevolutionary processes results in across-species va

96 Clarifying how microevolutionary processes scale to macroevolutionary p

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

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

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

100 of metabolic allometry in animals by linking microevolutionary processes to macroevolutionary pattern

101 The temporal element linking microevolutionary processes to macroevolutionary pattern

102 increase biodiversity, but evidence linking microevolutionary processes to macroevolutionary pattern

103 ntal question in evolutionary biology is how microevolutionary processes translate into species diver

104 To understand better the microevolutionary processes underlying these interspecif

105 s a balance between adaptive and nonadaptive microevolutionary processes within a species.

106 Microevolutionary processes, including mutation, genetic

107 Unlike microevolutionary processes, little is known about the g

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

109 whether these marked changes can emerge from microevolutionary processes.

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

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

112 to these processes are linked to changes in microevolutionary processes.

113 ration length is an important determinant of microevolutionary rates, and body size is often used as

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

115 ust signals through phenotypic plasticity or microevolutionary response to natural selection.

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

117 Quantifying and predicting microevolutionary responses to environmental change requ

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

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

120 c regions implicated in trait evolution on a microevolutionary scale in many species, but whether the

121 On a microevolutionary scale, the observed large epistatic va

122 for investigating population affinities at a microevolutionary scale.

123 angle to questions traditionally explored at microevolutionary scale.

124 hort evolutionary trajectories, those on the microevolutionary scale.

125 In our microevolutionary selection experiments, the infectivity

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

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

128 While microevolutionary studies have described examples in whi

129 Microevolutionary studies of the coevolutionary process

130 which together present a fascinating test of microevolutionary theory.

131 atural variation in adaptive morphology on a microevolutionary timescale.

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

133 utations that are overlooked by conventional microevolutionary tools.

134 dynamics: Competitive interactions affected microevolutionary trajectories on a timescale relevant t

135 This unexpected microevolutionary trend is explained by genetic linkage

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

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

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

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

140 ng a broader framework for understanding how microevolutionary within-species dynamics shape macroevo