ArticleEvolution letters2026
Realization of ongoing evolutionary adaptation in the field.
Article in Evolution letters, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The rapid pace of environmental change has prompted pressing concerns about the persistence of wild populations. For plants, because they move from one place to another only passively between generations, their persistence is especially likely to depend on their capacity for ongoing adaptive evolution. There are numerous examples of rapid adaptation in the recent past, but evidence about rates of adaptation in the wild is limited. Previously, to assess the capacity for genetic adaptation of three wild plant populations growing in their source locations, we have estimated their additive genetic variance for fitness in three successive years. Here, we present the actual difference between successive generations in their average absolute fitness. We partition this change into components resulting from genetic change and due to environmental difference, as well as a residual component. In each of six cases of intergenerational change, we have detected evolutionary adaptation as genetic increase in average fitness during the first generation, while also finding generally greater effects of differences in environment between years. Nevertheless, we show that when environmental change reduces a population's average fitness, these adaptive genetic responses often substantively ameliorate its deleterious impact.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.