|
r
e s e a r c h.. f o c u s :
Comparative
analysis 
Lessons
learned from experiments of extant populations, particularly in
the laboratory, are unlikely to provide sufficient or all of the
necessary information needed for a robust understanding of evolutionary
history. We try to combine studies of microevolutionary processes
within populations with studies of macroevolutionary patterns among
species to better resolve how sexual selection has influenced the
evolutionary trajectory of the Drosophila lineage.
Selected
Related Publications:
Starmer,
W.T., Polak, M., Barker, J.S.F., McEvey, S., Pitnick, S.
and L.L. Wolf. 2002. Phylogenetic, geographic, and temporal analysis
of female reproductive trade-offs in Drosophila. Evolutionary
Biology, 33:139-171.. [PDF]
Pitnick,
S., T.A. Markow, and G.S. Spicer. 1999. Evolution of multiple
kinds of female sperm-storage organs in Drosophila. Evolution 53: 1804-1822. [PDF]
Pitnick,
S., Spicer, G.S., and T.A. Markow. 1997. Phylogenetic examination
of male ejaculatory donations in Drosophila. Evolution 51: 833-845. [PDF]
Karr,
T.L., and S. Pitnick. 1996. The ins and outs of fertilization.
Nature 379: 405-406.
Pitnick,
S. 1996. Investment in testes and the cost of making long sperm
in Drosophila. The American Naturalist 148: 57-80. [PDF]
Pitnick,
S., Markow, T.A., and G.S. Spicer. 1995. Delayed male maturity
is a cost of producing large sperm in Drosophila. Proceedings
of the National Academy of Science, USA 92: 10614-10618. [PDF]
For
more details and selected publications on the different aspects
of my research program, follow these links:
|
