Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T08:28:51.140Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The production of visible mutations in Drosophila by chloroethyl methanesulphonate (CB 1506)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2009

C. Auerbach
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Genetics, Edinburgh, 9
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.

The claim that CB 1506 produces an unusually high proportion of visible to lethal mutations could not be confirmed. The ratio of visible to lethal sex-linked mutations was less than 1:10 in both Muller-5 and attached-X tests. In one brood it rose to 1:5 when unconfirmed visible mutants were included. The much higher ratio obtained by Fahmy and Fahmy is interpreted as a methodological artifact, due to the inclusion in their calculations of mosaic visibles but not of mosaic lethals.

Two visible mutations—twisted abdomen and wsatsuma—occurred more than once. This suggests the possibility of a locus or allele specific effect of CB 1506.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1962

References

REFERENCES

Auerbach, C. (1957). The production of visible mutations by chloroethyl methanesulphonate (CB 1506). Drosophila Inform. Serv. 31, 107109.Google Scholar
Auerbach, C. & Woolf, B. (1960). Alpha and beta loci in Drosophila. Genetics, 45, 16911707.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Browning, L. S. & Altenburg, E. (1962). Gonadal mosaicism as a factor in determining the ratio of visible to lethal mutations in Drosophila. Genetics, 46, 13181321.Google Scholar
Carlson, E. A. & Oster, I. I. (1961). Chemical-mutagen induced mosaicism at the dumpy locus. Genetics, 46, 856857.Google Scholar
Fahmy, O. G. & Fahmy, M. J. (1956). Mutagenicity of 2-chloroethyl methanesulphonate in Drosophila melanogaster. Nature, 177, 996997.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fahmy, O. G. & Fahmy, M. J. (1957). Further evidence for differential effects of mutagens in Drosophila melanogaster. J. Genet. 55, 280287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fahmy, O. G. & Fahmy, M. J. (1960). Cytogenetic analysis of the action of carcinogens and tumour inhibitors in Drosophila melanogaster. VII. Differential induction of visible to lethal mutations by related nitrogen mustards. Genetics, 45, 419438.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Glassman, E. (1959). Allelism and complementation of bronzy (b) and maroon-like (ma-l) eye color mutants in D. melanogaster. Drosophila Inform. Serv. 33, 135.Google Scholar
Purdom, C. E. (1957). Autonomous action of lethal mutations induced in the germ cells of Drosophila melanogaster by 2-chloroethyl methanesulphonate. Nature, 180, 8183.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schttltz, J. (1936). Radiation and the study of mutations in animals. Biological Effects of Radiation, Vol. 2, 12091261. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Spencer, W. P. & Stern, C. (1948). Experiments to test the validity of the linear r-dose/ mutation frequency relation in Drosophila at low dosage. Genetics, 33, 4374.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Timoféeff-ressovsky, N. W. & Delbruck, M. (1936). Strahlengenetische Versuche über sichtbare Mutationen und die Mutabilität einzelner Gene bei Drosophila melanogaster. Z. indukt. Abstamm.- u. VererbLehre, 71, 322344.Google Scholar