Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T08:56:45.470Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The estimation of generation interval in experimental populations of Drosophila

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2009

J. S. F. Barker
J. S. F. Barker
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Husbandry, University of Sydney, Sydney, 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.

A method for the experimental estimation of generation interval is presented together with results obtained at 25° C. for D. melanogaster Oregon-R-C maintained in population cages and in population bottles, and for D. simulans v in population bottles. Although there is significant variation between the replicate estimates obtained in population bottles, and although a number of potential sources of error have been discussed, it is suggested that this method provides useful operational estimates of the parameter, which may be taken as 23 days for D. melanogaster Oregon-R-C in population cages, 14 days for the same stock in population bottles, and 16 to 18 days for D. simulans v in population bottles.

Type
Research Article
Information
Genetics Research , Volume 3 , Issue 3 , November 1962 , pp. 388 - 404
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1962

References

REFERENCES

Barker, J. S. F. (1960 a). Yet another population cage. Drosophila Inform. Serv. 34, 113.Google Scholar
Barker, J. S. F. (1960 b). An adaptation of the population bottle of Reed and Reed (1948). Drosophila Inform. Serv. 34, 113–114.Google Scholar
Birch, L. C. (1948). The intrinsic rate of natural increase of an insect population. J. Anim. Ecol. 17, 15–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birch, L. C. (1955). Selection in Drosophila pseudoobscura in relation to crowding. Evolution, 9, 389–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonnier, G., Jonsson, U. B. & Ramel, C. (1959). Experiments on the effects of homozygosity and heterozygosity on the rate of development in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics, 44, 679–704.Google Scholar
Buzzati-Traverso, A. A. (1955). Evolutionary changes in components of fitness and other polygenic traits in Drosophila melanogaster populations. Heredity, 9, 153–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carson, H. L. (1958). Increase in fitness in experimental populations resulting from heterosis. Proc. not. Acad. Sci., Wash., 44, 1136–1141.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chiang, H. C. & Hodson, A. C. (1950). An analytical study of population growth in Drosophila melanogaster. Ecol. Monogr. 20, 179–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Claringbold, P. J. & Barker, J. S. F. (1961). The estimation of relative fitness of Drosophila populations. J. Theoret. Biol. 1, 190–203.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Erk, F. C. (1955). Competition between chromosomal aberrations associated with Curly and their wild type homologues in laboratory populations of Drosophila melangoaster. Genetics, 40, 331–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hochman, B. (1958). Competition between wild type isoalleles in experimental populations of Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics, 43, 101–121.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Levene, H., Pavlovsky, O. & Dobzhansky, Th. (1954). Interaction of the adaptive values in polymorphic experimental populations of Drosophila pseudoobscura. Evolution, 8, 335–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levene, H., Pavlovsky, O. & Dobzhansky, Th. (1958). Dependence of the adaptive values of certain genotypes in Drosophila pseudoobscura on the composition of the gene pool. Evolution, 12, 18–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewontin, R. C. (1955). The effects of population density and composition on viability in Drosophila melanogaster. Evolution, 9, 27–41.Google Scholar
Luddwin, I. (1951). Nautral selection in Drosophila melanogaster under laboratory conditions. Evolution, 5, 231–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merrell, D. J. (1953). Selective mating as a cause of gene frequency changes in laboratory populations of Drosophila melanogaster. Evolution, 7, 287–296.Google Scholar
Moree, R. (1955). The question of generation length in population models of Drosophila melanogaster. Drosophila Inform. Serv. 29, 142–143.Google Scholar
Parsons, P. A. (1959). Dependence of genotypic viabilities on co-existing genotypes in Drosophila. Heredity, 13, 393–402.Google Scholar
Prout, T. (1954). Genetic drift in irradiated experimental populations of Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics, 39, 529–545.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reed, S. C. & Reed, E. W. (1950). Natural selection in laboratory populations of Drosophila. II. Competition between a white-eye gene and its wild type allele. Evolution, 4, 34–42.Google Scholar
Robertson, F. W. & Sang, J. H. (1944). The ecological determinants of population growth in a Drosophila culture. I. Fecundity of adult flies. Proc. roy. Soc. B, 132, 258–277.Google Scholar
Sang, J. H. (1949 a). The ecological determinants of population growth in a Drosophila culture. III. Larval and pupal survival. Physiol. Zoöl. 22, 183–202.Google Scholar
Sang, J. H. (1949 b). The ecological determinants of population growth in a Drosophila culture. IV. The significance of successive batches of larvae. Physiol. Zoöl. 22, 202–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sang, J. H. (1949 c). The ecological determinants of population growth in a Drosophila culture. V. The adult population count. Physiol. Zoöl. 22, 210–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spiess, E. B. (1957). Relation between frequencies and adaptive values of chromosomal arrangements in Drosophila persimilis. Evolution, 11, 84–93.Google Scholar
Susman, M. & Carson, H. L. (1958). Development of balanced polymorphism in laboratory populations of Drosophila melanogaster. Amer. Nat. 92, 359–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallace, B. (1950). Autosomal lethals in experimental populations of Drosophila melanogaster. Evolution, 4, 172–174.Google Scholar
Wright, S. & Dobzhansky, Th. (1946). Genetics of natural populations. XII. Experimental reproduction of some of the changes caused by natural selection in certain populations of Drosophila pseudoobscura. Genetics, 31, 125–156.Google Scholar