2001
DOI: 10.2307/3558325
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Is self‐fertilization an evolutionary dead end? Revisiting an old hypothesis with genetic theories and a macroevolutionary approach

Abstract: G. Ledyard Stebbins suggested that self-fertilization (selfing) may be an evolutionary dead end because it may result in the loss of genetic diversity and consequently preclude adaptation to changing environments. While the basic premise of selfing as a dead end is widely accepted, there have been few rigorous evaluations of the hypothesis. We examine the foundations of the dead-end hypothesis by considering theoretical advances in the study of mating-system evolution. We discuss theories predicting the irreve… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

19
326
1
2

Year Published

2003
2003
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 331 publications
(349 citation statements)
references
References 75 publications
19
326
1
2
Order By: Relevance
“…This potential may not be realized when obligate selfing evolves for, as Darwin (1877, p. 292) suspected, selfing lineages are relatively ephemeral, perhaps because of increased extinction rates associated with reduced genetic diversity and accumulation of deleterious mutations (Takebayashi & Morrell 2001;Bartkowska & Johnston 2009). Furthermore, obligate selfing is an absorbing state from which outcrossing forms cannot evolve because no outcrossing benefit can counteract the twofold transmission advantage of selfed offspring (Takebayashi & Morrell 2001). Thus, the evolution of obligate selfing may be an expedient solution to prevailing PL that has a limited evolutionary future.…”
Section: Pollen Limitation and Plant Diversificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This potential may not be realized when obligate selfing evolves for, as Darwin (1877, p. 292) suspected, selfing lineages are relatively ephemeral, perhaps because of increased extinction rates associated with reduced genetic diversity and accumulation of deleterious mutations (Takebayashi & Morrell 2001;Bartkowska & Johnston 2009). Furthermore, obligate selfing is an absorbing state from which outcrossing forms cannot evolve because no outcrossing benefit can counteract the twofold transmission advantage of selfed offspring (Takebayashi & Morrell 2001). Thus, the evolution of obligate selfing may be an expedient solution to prevailing PL that has a limited evolutionary future.…”
Section: Pollen Limitation and Plant Diversificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Given this, methods that consider jointly the biases in diversification and character change are clearly needed. Although some empirical studies consider both biases together (e.g., Takebayashi and Morrell 2001), theoretical studies developing methods have focused on either diversification, or character change, but not both.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…All of these factors may be operating singly or in concert within self-fertilizing populations to reduce the efficacy of purifying selection and thereby increase the local drift load. If this occurs, then the maintenance of outcrossing may in part be explained by the extinction of self-fertilizing lineages Lynch et al 1995b;Takebayashi and Morrell 2001).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%