Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
Exact(1)
Assortative mating may result from lower-quality individuals mating with each other due to the inability to attract or retain a high quality mate, rather than preferences for a particular phenotype [14], [43].
Similar(59)
Ignoring the indirect genetic effect (IGE) of an individual on the phenotype of its group mates may result in a reversal of the direction of the selection response.
Although plants in large patches may have more compatible flowers to mate with and be more attractive to pollinators, the low efficiency of pollen exchange between mates may result in incompatible pollen discounting.
In the extreme case, these matings may result from negative assortative mating.
When habitat deterioration alters signals used in mate choice, maladaptive mate choices may result that reduce the viability of future generations.
The absence of a record of mating combat may result from lack of observation.
Species and population-specific signaling is often required by both sexes prior to fertilization in multiply mating species where mate choice decisions may result in increased fitness for offspring due to sexual selection.
Alternatively, such an expanded mating-type locus may result from only passive accumulation of mutations in the duplicated (male and female) genome regions that are divergent enough to inhibit gene conversion (Teshima and Innan 2004).
First, the decrease in mating activity in sympatry may result from selection favoring increased aggression, which ultimately interferes with courtship.
Stronger resistance towards mating attempts in infuscans females may result from more excessive male mating harassment in the field.
Note that here "outbreeding" and "inbreeding" mean mating between different and identical gamete types, respectively, i.e., we assume – without specifying the precise nature of this outbreeding advantage – that mating between different gamete types may result in fitter offspring on average than mating between cells of the same (pan-sexual) gamete type.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com