4.8 Article

The Demographic Transition Influences Variance in Fitness and Selection on Height and BMI in Rural Gambia

期刊

CURRENT BIOLOGY
卷 23, 期 10, 页码 884-889

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2013.04.006

关键词

-

资金

  1. UK MRC [MC-A760-5QX00]
  2. Wellcome Trust
  3. European Research Council
  4. Wissenschaftskolleg zu Berlin
  5. European Institutes for Advanced Study (EURIAS) Fellowship.Program
  6. Leibniz Institute for Zoo
  7. Wildlife Research (IZW)
  8. ERC
  9. MRC [MC_U123292701] Funding Source: UKRI
  10. Medical Research Council [MC_U123292701] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent human history is marked by demographic transitions characterized by declines in mortality and fertility [1]. By influencing the variance in those fitness components, demographic transitions can affect selection on other traits [2]. Parallel to changes in selection triggered by demography per se, relationships between fitness and anthropometric traits are also expected to change due to modification of the environment. Here we explore for the first time these two main evolutionary consequences of demographic transitions using a unique data set containing survival, fertility, and anthropometric data for thousands of women in rural Gambia from 1956-2010 [3]. We show how the demographic transition influenced directional selection on height and body mass index (BMI). We observed a change in selection for both traits mediated by variation in fertility: selection initially favored short females with high BMI values but shifted across the demographic transition to favor tall females with low BMI values. We demonstrate that these differences resulted both from changes in fitness variance that shape the strength of selection and from shifts in selective pressures triggered by environmental changes. These results suggest that demographic and environmental trends encountered by current human populations worldwide are likely to modify, but not stop, natural selection in humans.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据