Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T14:39:56.278Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effects of population size and selection intensity in selection for a quantitative character in Drosophila: III. Analyses of the lines

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2009

R. Frankham ,
L. P. Jones  and
J. S. F. Barker
R. Frankham
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Husbandry, University of Sydney, Sydney, N.S.W., 2006, Australia
L. P. Jones
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Husbandry, University of Sydney, Sydney, N.S.W., 2006, Australia
J. S. F. Barker
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Husbandry, University of Sydney, Sydney, N.S.W., 2006, Australia
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

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.

1. In order to determine the nature of the genetic variation causing the response to selection in our lines (Jones et al. 1968), various analyses were performed.

2. There was no consistent change in heritability, estimated from half-sib correlation or from the phenotypic correlation between the bristle numbers of two abdominal segments, after 10 to 20 generations of selection.

3. Realized heritabilities over the 10 generations subsequent to the heritability estimations were less than in the early generations but bore little relationship to the estimated values.

4. Six lines contained recessive lethals with appreciable effects on bristle number as indicated by high variances, large regression on relaxation and large response to reverse selection.

5. Reverse selection lines taken from the main lines at generation 40 indicated that genetic variation was still present in almost all of the lines. Only one line failed to respond to further forward or to reverse selection.

6. The three highest lines were crossed in pairs and reselected. Two of the three possible crosses gave further response, exceeding the higher parent after one and three generations, but the other cross failed to pass the highest parent line.

7. A combination of large gene effects, linkage, and gene interaction effects have been suggested as the cause of irregularities in the response of the lines. It has not been possible to determine the relative importance of these effects.

Type
Research Article
Information
Genetics Research , Volume 12 , Issue 3 , December 1968 , pp. 267 - 283
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1968

References

REFERENCES

Breese, E. L. & Mather, K. (1957). The organisation of polygenic activity within a chromosome in Drosophila. I. Hair characters. Heredity 11, 373–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, W. P. & Bell, A. E. (1961). Genetic analysis of a ‘plateaued’ population of Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 46, 407–425.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clayton, G. A. & Robertson, A. (1957). An experimental check on quantitative genetical theory. II. Long-term effects of selection. J. Genet. 55, 152–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dempster, E. R. (1963). Concepts and definitions in relation to selection schemes. In Statistical Genetics and Plant Breeding Ed. Hanson, W. D. and Robinson, H. F.. National Academy of Sciences—National Research Council, Publ. 982, 35–44.Google Scholar
Dempster, E. R., Lehner, I. M. & Lowry, D. C. (1952). Continuous selection for egg production in poultry. Genetics 37, 693–708.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dickerson, G. E. (1955). Genetic slippage in response to selection for multiple objectives. Cold Spring Harb. Symp. quant. Biol. 20, 166–177.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Falconer, D. S. (1960). Introduction to Quantitative Genetics. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd.Google Scholar
Falconer, D. S. & King, J. W. (1953). A study of selection limits in the mouse. J. Genet. 51, 561–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frankham, R. (1967). Studies in quantitative genetics and selection theory using Drosophila melanogaster. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Sydney.Google 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. I. Short-term response to selection. Genet. Res. 12, 237–248.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fraser, A. S. & Hansche, P. E. (1965). Simulation of genetic systems. Major and minor loci. In Genetics Today, 3, 507–516. Ed. Geerts, S. J.. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Fraser, A. S., Scowcroft, W. R., Nassar, R., Angeles, H. & Bravo, G. (1965). Variation of scutellar bristles in Drosophila. IV. Effects of selection. Aust. J. biol. Sci. 18, 599–617.Google ScholarPubMed
Griffing, B. (1960). Accommodation of linkage in mass selection theory. Aust. J. biol. Sci. 13, 501–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, W. G. & Robertson, A. (1966). The effect of linkage on limits to artificial selection. Genet. Res. 8, 269–294.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
James, J. W. (1962). Conflict between centripetal and directional selection. Heredity 17, 487–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
James, J. W. (1966). Correlations between relatives when intermediates are fittest. Aust. J. biol. Sci. 19, 301–306.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jones, L. P., Frankham, R. & Barker, J. S. F. (1968). The effects of population size and selection intensity in selection for a quantitative character in Drosophila. II. Long-term response to selection. Genet. Res. 12, 249–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, J. C. (1955). Integration of the gene pool as demonstrated by resistance to DDT. Am. Nat. 89, 39–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, J. C. & Somme, L. (1958). Chromosomal analyses of the genetic factors for resistance to DDT in two resistant lines of Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 43, 577–593.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Latter, B. D. H. (1965). The response to artificial selection due to autosomal genes of large effect. I. Changes in gene frequency at an additive locus. Aust. J. biol. Sci. 18, 585–598.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Latter, B. D. H. (1966). The response to artificial selection due to autosomal genes of large effect. III. The effects of linkage on the rate of advance and approach to fixation in finite populations. Aust. J. biol. Sci. 19, 131–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Law, C. N. (1966). The location of genetic factors affecting a quantitative character in wheat. Genetics 53, 487–498.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Law, C. N. (1967). The location of genetic factors controlling a number of quantitative characters in wheat. Genetics 56, 445–461.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
MacIntyre, R. J. & Wright, T. R. F. (1966). Recombination in FM4/+; SM1/+; Ubx130/ + heterozygotes. Drosoph. Inf. Serv. 41, 141.Google Scholar
Mather, K. & Harrison, B. J. (1949). The manifold effect of selection. I and II. Heredity 3, 1–52, 131–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, R. C. (1967). The limits to artificial selection for body weight in the mouse. III. Selection from crosses between previously selected lines. Genet. Res. 9, 73–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, A. (1960). A theory of limits in artificial selection. Proc. Roy. Soc. B 153, 234–249.Google Scholar
Robertson, A. (1966). Artificial selection in plants and animals. Proc. Roy. Soc. B 164, 341–349.Google ScholarPubMed
Robertson, F. W. (1954). Studies in quantitative inheritance. V. Chromosome analysis of crosses between selected and unselected lines of different body size in Drosophila melanogaster. J. Genet. 52, 494–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robebtson, F. W. & Reeve, E. C. R. (1953). Studies in quantitative inheritance. IV. The effects of substituting chromosomes from selected strains in different genetic backgrounds in Drosophila melanogaster. J. Genet. 51, 586–610.Google Scholar
Scowcroft, W. R. (1966). Variation of scutellar bristles in Drosophila. IX. Chromosomal analysis of scutellar bristle selection lines. Genetics 53, 389–402.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sheldon, B. L. (1963). Studies in artificial selection of quantitative characters. I. Selection for abdominal bristles in Drosophila melanogaster. Aust. J. biol. Sci. 16, 490–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheridan, A. K., Frankham, R., Jones, L. P., Rathie, K. A. & Barker, J. S. F. (1968). Partitioning of variance and estimation of genetic parameters for various bristle number characters of Drosophila melanogaster. Theoret. Appl. Genet. 38 (in the Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spickett, S. G. & Thoday, J. M. (1966). Regular responses to selection. 3. Interaction between located polygenes. Genet. Res. 7, 96–121.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tantawy, A. O. (1956). Selection for long and short wing length in Drosophila melanogaster, with different systems of mating. Genetica 28, 231–262.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tantawy, A. O. (1957). Genetic variance of random-inbred lines of Drosophila melanogaster in relation to coefficients of inbreeding. Genetics 42, 121–136.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tantawy, A. O. (1959). Selection limits with sibmatings in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 44, 287–295.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tantawy, A. O. & Reeve, E. C. R. (1956). Studies in quantitative inheritance. IX. The effects of inbreeding at different rates in Drosophila melanogaster. Z. indukt. Abstamm.-u. Vererblehre 87, 648–667.Google ScholarPubMed
Thoday, J. M. & Boam, T. B. (1961). Regular responses to selection. I. Description of responses. Genet. Res. 2, 161–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wehrhahn, C. & Allard, R. W. (1965). The detection and measurement of the effects of individual genes involved in the inheritance of a quantitative character in wheat. Genetics 51, 109–119.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed