“…For diapause induction, empirical insights acquired from population crosses and QTL studies are consistent with Mendelian inheritance patterns (Doležel, Vaněčková, Šauman, & Hodkova, ; Han & Denlinger, ; Suwa & Gotoh, ) or indicate an architecture with few loci of large effect sizes (Chen, Xiao, He, Xu, & Xue, ; Danilevskii, ; Demont & Blanckenhorn, ; Fu, Chen, Xiao, He, & Xue, ; Hagen & Scriber, ; Ikten, Skoda, Hunt, Molina‐Ochoa, & Foster, ; Kim, Krafsur, Bailey, & Zhao, ; Kurahashi & Ohtaki, ; Lehmann, Margus, & Lindström, ; McCoy, Lloyd, & Bartlett, ; McWatters & Saunders, ; Pruisscher et al., ; Rockey, Hainze, & Scriber, ; Söderlind & Nylin, ; Xia, Chen, Tu, Yang, & Xue, ), with several reporting large sex‐linked effects (Chen et al., ; Fu et al., ; Hagen & Scriber, ; Ikten et al., ; Nylin, Wickman, & Wiklund, ; Pruisscher et al., ; Rockey et al., ). Studies on quantitative trait loci for CPP show that effect sizes can be highly variable depending on the genetic background of the crosses involved (Bradshaw, Emerson, Catchen, Cresko, & Holzapfel, ). Additionally, as diapause induction is a plastic threshold trait, inheritance patterns depend on the environmental conditions used for phenotyping (Pruisscher et al., ).…”