Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-jwnkl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-13T22:22:58.493Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genetic differences between populations of Drosophila melanogaster for a quantitative trait: I. Laboratory populations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2009

C. López-Fanjul  and
W. G. Hill
C. López-Fanjul
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Genetics, Edinburgh EH9 3JN
W. G. Hill
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Genetics, Edinburgh EH9 3JN

Summary

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

An experiment was carried out to test whether two laboratory cage populations of Drosophila melanogaster from different origins (Kaduna and Pacific) differed in the genes for sternopleural bristle number. The means, variances and heritabilities of the two populations and the synthetic formed from crosses between them were very similar.

Selection for low bristle number was practised in small replicate lines, six of each pure population and nine of the synthetic. On average, Pacific responded to selection rather more rapidly than either Kaduna or the synthetic, but there was little difference in the limit achieved.

Crosses between replicates within populations were made and selection continued, and these lines subsequently crossed between populations and reselected. Additional response was obtained by this procedure but the crosses between the replicates of the pure and synthetic populations attained similar selection limits.

An analysis of effects of individual chromosomes from the selected lines on bristle number indicated that the contribution of each chromosome to total response was about the same in Pacific, Kaduna and the synthetic.

It is concluded that differences in gene frequency, rather than the presence or absence of particular alleles, are mainly responsible for the differences observed between the populations.

Type
Research Article
Information
Genetics Research , Volume 22 , Issue 1 , August 1973 , pp. 51 - 68
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1973

References

REFERENCES

Anderson, W. W. (1968). Further evidence for coadaptation in crosses between geographic populations of Drosophila pseudoobscura. Genetical Research 12, 317–330.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bulmer, M. G. (1971). The effect of selection on genetic variability. American Naturalist 105, 201–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clayton, G. A., Morris, J. A. & Robertson, A. (1957). An experimental check on quantitative genetical theory. I. Short-term responses to selection. Journal of Genetics 55, 131–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clayton, G. A. & Robertson, A. (1955). Mutation and quantitative variation. American Naturalist 89, 151–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clayton, G. A. & Robertson, A. (1964). The effects of X-rays on quantitative characters. Genetical Research 5, 410–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dev, D. S., Jaap, R. G. & Harvey, W. R. (1969). Results of selection for eight-week body weight in three broiler populations of chickens. Poultry Science 48, 1336–1348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dobzhansky, Th. (1970). Genetics of the Evolutionary Process. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Falconer, D. S. & King, J. W. B. (1953). A study of selection limits in the mouse. Journal of Genetics 51, 561–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frankham, R., Jones, L. P. & Barker, J. S. F. (1968). The effects of population size and selection intensity in selection for a quantitative character in Drosophila. III. Analysis of lines. Genetical Research 12, 267–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, W. G. (1970). Design of experiments to estimate heritability by regression of offspring on selected parents. Biometrics 26, 565–571.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hill, W. G. (1972). Estimation of realised heritabilities from selection experiments. II. Selection in one direction. Biometrics 28, 767–780.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jackson, N. & James, J. W. (1970). Comparison of three Australian Merino strains for wool and body traits. II. Estimates of between-stud genetic parameters. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 21, 837–856.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lerner, I. M. (1954). Genetic Homeostasis. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd.Google Scholar
Lopéz-Fanjul, C. (1974). Selection from crossbred populations. Animal Breeding Abstracts (submitted).Google Scholar
Lopéz-Fanjtjl, C. & Hill, W. G. (1973). Genetic differences between populations of Drosophila melanogaster for a quantitative trait. II. Wild and laboratory populations. Genetical Research 22, 69–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Madalena, F. E. (1970). Studies on the limits to artificial selection. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Madalena, F. E. & Hill, W. G. (1972). Population structure in artificial selection programmes: Simulation studies. Genetical Research 20, 75–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Maruyama, T. (1970). On the fixation probability of mutant genes in a subdivided population. Genetical Research 15, 221–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McFarquhar, A. M. & Robertson, F. W. (1963). The lack of evidence for coadaptation in crosses between geographical races of Drosophila subobscura Coll. Genetical Research 4, 104–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McPhee, C. P. & Robertson, A. (1970). The effect of suppressing crossing over on the response to selection in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetical Research 16, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Milkman, R. D. (1965). The genetic basis of natural variation. VII. The individuality of poly-genic combinations in Drosophila. Genetics 52, 789–799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milkman, R. D. (1970). The genetic basis of natural variation. X. Recurrence of cve poly-genes. Genetics 65, 289–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Brien, S. J. & McIntyre, R. J. (1969). An analysis of gene-enzyme variability in natural populations of Drosophila melanogaster and D. simulans. American Naturalist 103, 97–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osman, H. El Sayed & Robertson, A. (1968). The introduction of genetic material from inferior into superior strains. Genetical Research 12, 221–236.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Prakash, S., Lewontin, R. C. & Hubby, J. L. (1969). A molecular approach to the study of genic heterozygosity in natural populations. IV. Patterns of genic variation in central, marginal and isolated populations of Drosophila pseudoobscura. Genetics 61, 841–858.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prevosti, A. (1955). Geographical variability in quantitative traits in populations of Drosophila subobscura. Cold Spring Harbor Symposium on Quantitative Biology 20, 294–299.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reeve, E. C. R. (1961). A note on non-random mating in progeny tests. Genetical Research 2, 195–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, R. C. (1967 a). The limits to artificial selection for body weight in the mouse. III. Selection from crosses between previously selected lines. Genetical Research 9, 73–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, R. C. (1967 b). The limits to artificial selection for body weight in the mouse. IV. Sources of new genetic variance-Irradiation and outcrossing. Genetical Research 9, 87–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, A. (1960). A theory of limits in artificial selection. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 153, 234–249.Google Scholar
Robertson, A. (1970). A theory of limits in artificial selection with many linked loci. In Mathematical Topics in Population Genetics (ed. K., Kojima), pp. 246–288. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, F. W. (1955). Selection response and the properties of genetic variation. Cold Spring Harbor Symposium on Quantitative Biology 20, 166–177.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robertson, F. W. (1960). The ecological genetics of growth in Drosophila. I. Body size and developmental time on different diets. Genetical Research 1, 298–304.Google Scholar
Underwood, S. (1971). Selection procedures in populations. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Wahlund, S. (1928). Zuzammensetzung von Populationen und Korrelationserscheinungen vom Standpunkt der Vererbungslehre aus betrachtet. Hereditas 11, 65–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, S. (1952). The genetics of quantitative variability. In Quantitative Inheritance (ed. Reeve, E. C. R. and Waddington, C. H.), pp. 5–41. London: H.M.S.O.Google Scholar