Inappropriate comparisons and the weakness of cryptic choice: a reply to Vincent J. Lynch and D. J. Hosken.

doi:10.1111/j.1525-142X.2008.00249.x

Loading publication...

Noodle always counts identifier-free feature events for service operation. With your permission, Google Analytics can also estimate audience and engagement. Search text, publication identifiers, cookies, IP addresses and browser fingerprints are never included in Noodle's first-party event counters.

Privacy details

Community

Back to search

Article

Inappropriate comparisons and the weakness of cryptic choice: a reply to Vincent J. Lynch and D. J. Hosken.

Evolution & development - 1 Jan 2000

Wallen Kim, Lloyd Elisabeth A

Abstract excerpt

No abstract is available from the source.

Read the complete abstract on PubMed

Topics

Share this publication in a Topic to start or enrich a Post.

Share to Adaptation, Biological
Share to Biological Evolution
Share to Genetic Variation
Share to Penis

Methodology Data sources Editorial policy Privacy About Contact Helena Bioinformatics

Share to Selection, Genetic

Share to Sex Characteristics

Share to Vagina

Source

Open in PubMed

Identifiers

PMID: 18638315
DOI: 10.1111/j.1525-142X.2008.00249.x

Provenance

PubMed metadata and Literature Corpus relationships. Corpus snapshot updated 7 Sept 2026.

Related research

Semantic proximity does not establish scientific evidence.

Research trail→

Click a neighbor to travelStep 1 · 12 closest

Inappropriate comparisons and the weakness of cryptic choice: a reply to Vincent J. Lynch and D. J. Hosken.PMID 18638315Read ↗

Scrutinizing the Right Not to Know.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Terms and conditions: semantic complexity and aspirin resistance.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Selection and the origin of information.Semantic proximity Read ↗

A case of mistaken identity.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Countercurrents: The bias of choice.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Cryptorchidism and long-term consequencesSemantic proximity Read ↗

Y are males so difficult to understand?: a case where "X" does not mark the spot.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Valuable and valueless diversity.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Causal inferences: identical twins help and clarity about necessary assumptions is critical.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Instruction, selection, or tampering with the odds?Semantic proximity Read ↗

Ignorance is bliss? An ethical question.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Does one plus one always equal two?Semantic proximity Read ↗

⌁Select a neighboring publication to make it the new centre.