scispace - formally typeset
H

H. Lisle Gibbs

Researcher at Ohio State University

Publications -  137
Citations -  6325

H. Lisle Gibbs is an academic researcher from Ohio State University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Population & Reproductive success. The author has an hindex of 43, co-authored 132 publications receiving 5681 citations. Previous affiliations of H. Lisle Gibbs include University of Michigan & McMaster University.

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Realized reproductive success of polygynous red-winged blackbirds revealed by DNA markers.

TL;DR: Genetically based measures of reproductive success show that individual males realize more than 20% of their overall success from extra-pair fertilizations, on average, and that this form of mating behavior confounds traditional measures of male success.
Journal ArticleDOI

Genomic signals of selection predict climate-driven population declines in a migratory bird

TL;DR: Broadly, this study suggests that the integration of genomic adaptation can increase the accuracy of future species distribution models and ultimately guide more effective mitigation efforts.
Journal ArticleDOI

Oscillating selection on Darwin's finches

TL;DR: A reversal in the direction of selection following the opposite climatic extreme is documented, and the connection between oscillating selection and fluctuations in food supply is demonstrated.
Journal ArticleDOI

Genetic evidence for female host-specific races of the common cuckoo

TL;DR: Genetic evidence that gentes are restricted to female lineages is provided, with cross mating by males maintaining the common cuckoo genetically as one species, and there is differentiation between gentes in maternally inherited mitochondrial DNA, but not in microsatellite loci of nuclear DNA is shown.
Journal ArticleDOI

Recurrent patterns of natural selection in a population of Darwin's finches

TL;DR: It is shown that in two subsequent periods of moderate to high adult mortality (1980 and 1982), the population was subject to the same selection as before, and beak depth and body weight were commonly under direct selection to increase but, surprisingly, beak width was directly selected to decrease.