Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T12:52:47.398Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Variance components of fitness under stabilizing selection

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2009

Hidenori Tachida  and
C. Clark Cockerham
Hidenori Tachida
Affiliation:
Department of Statistics, North Carolina State University, Box 8203, Raleigh, NC 27695-8203, USA
C. Clark Cockerham
Affiliation:
Department of Statistics, North Carolina State University, Box 8203, Raleigh, NC 27695-8203, USA
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

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.

Variance components of fitness under the stabilizing selection scheme of Wright (1935) for metric characters are calculated, extending his original analysis to the case with any number of alleles and multiple characters assuming additivity of gene effects. They are calculated in terms of the moments of the effects of alleles at individual loci for the metric characters. From these formulas, the variance components of fitness are evaluated at the mutation–selection equilibria predicted by the ‘Gaussian’ approximation (Lande, 1976), which is applicable if the per locus mutation rate is high, and the ‘House of Cards’ approximation (Turelli, 1984), which is applicable if the per locus mutation rate is low. It is found that the additive variance of fitness is small compared to non-additive variance in the ‘Gaussian’ case, whereas the additive variance is larger than non-additive variance in the ‘House of Cards’ case if the number of loci per character and the number of characters affected by each locus are not too large. With the assumption that a significant portion of fitness is due to this type of stabilizing selection, it is suggested that the real parameters are in the range where the ‘House of Cards’ approximation is applicable, since available data on variance components of fitness components in Drosophila show that the additive variance is far larger than the non-additive variance. It is noted that the present method does not discriminate the two approximations if the average values of the metric characters deviate from the optimum values. Other limitations of the present method are also discussed.

Type
Research Article
Information
Genetics Research , Volume 51 , Issue 1 , February 1988 , pp. 47 - 53
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1988

References

Barton, N. H. (1986). The maintenance of polygenic variation through a balance between mutation and stabilizing selection. Genetical Research 47, 209–216.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cockerham, C. Clark (1963). Estimation of genetic variances. In Statistical Genetics and Plant Breeding (ed. Hanson, W. D. and Robinson, H. F.), pp. 53–94. National Academy of Sciences and National Research Council Publication No. 982, Washington, D.C., USA.Google Scholar
Cockerham, C. Clark (1980). Random and fixed effects in plant genetics. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 56, 119–131.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dobzhansky, Th. (1970). Genetics of the Evolutionary Process. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Dobzhansky, Th. & Levene, H. (1955). Genetics of natural populations. XXIV. Developmental homeostasis in natural populations of Drosophila pseudobscura. Genetics 40, 779–808.Google Scholar
Fleming, W. H. (1979). Equilibrium distributions of continuous polygenic traits. SIAM Journal of Applied Mathematics 36, 148–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoi-Sen, Y. (1972). Is subline differentiation a continuing process in inbred strains of mice? Genetical Research 19, 53–59.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kimura, M. (1965). A stochastic model concerning the maintenance of genetic variability in quantitative characters. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A. 54, 731–736.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kusakabe, S. & Mukai, T. (1984). The genetic structure of natural populations of Drosophila melanogaster. XVII. A population carrying genetic variability explicable by the classical hypothesis. Genetics 108, 393–408.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lande, R. (1976). The maintenance of genetic variability by mutation in a polygenic character with linked loci. Genetical Research 26, 221–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lande, R. (1980). The genetic covariance between characters maintained by pleiotropic mutation. Genetics 94, 203–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lande, R. & Schemske, D. W. (1985). The evolution of self-fertilization and inbreeding depression in plants, I. Genetic models. Evolution 39, 29–40.Google ScholarPubMed
Latter, B. D. H. (1960). Natural selection for an intermediate optimum. Australian Journal of Biological Sciences 13, 30–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackay, T. F. C. (1986). A quantitative genetic analysis of fitness and its components in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetical Research 47, 59–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mukai, T. (1969). The genetic structure of natural populations of Drosophila melanogaster. VII. Synergistic interaction of spontaneous mutant polygenes controlling viability, Genetics 61, 749–761.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mukai, T. (1985). Experimental verification of the neutral theory. In Population Genetics and Molecular Evolution (ed. Ohta, T. & Aoki, K.). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Mukai, T., Cardellino, R. A., Watanabe, T. K. & Crow, J. F. (1974). The genetic variance for viability and its components in a local population of Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 78, 1195–1208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mukai, T., Chigusa, S. I., Mettler, L. E. & Crow, J. F. (1972). Mutation rate and dominance of genes affecting viability in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 72, 335–355.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mukai, T. & Nagano, S. (1983). The genetic structure of natural populations of Drosophila melanogaster. XVI. Excess of additive genetic variance of viability. Genetics 105, 115–134.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ohnishi, O. (1977). Spontaneous and ethyl methane-sulfonate-induced mutations controlling viability in Drosophila melanogaster. II. Homozygous effect of polygenic mutations. Genetics 87, 529–545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, M. R. & Charlesworth, B. (1981). Genetics of life history in Drosophila melanogaster. I. Sib analysis of adult females. Genetics 97, 173–186.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Russel, W. A., Sprague, G. F. & Penny, L. H. (1963). Mutations affecting quantitative characters in long-time inbred lines of maize. Crop Science 3, 175–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simmons, M. J., Preston, C. R. & Engels, W. R. (1980). Pleiotropic effects on fitness of mutations affecting viability in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 94, 467–475.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tachida, H., Matsuda, M., Kusakabe, S. & Mukai, T. (1983). Variance component analysis for viability in an isolated population of Drosophila melanogaster. Genetical Research 42, 207–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tachida, H. & Mukai, T. (1985). The genetic structure of natural populations of Drosophila melanogaster. XIX. Genotype–environment interaction in viability. Genetics 111, 43–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Turelli, M. (1984). Heritable genetic variation via mutation–selection balance: Lerch's zeta meets the abdominal bristle. Theoretical Population Biology 25, 138–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turelli, M. (1985). Effects of pleiotropy on predictions concerning mutation–selection balance for polygenic traits. Genetics 111, 165–195.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Turelli, M. (1986). Gaussian versus non-gaussian genetic analysis of polygenic mutation–selection balance. In Evolutionary Process and Theory (ed. Karlin, S. and Nevo, E.), pp. 607–628. New York: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, S. (1935). The analyses of variance and the correlation between relatives with respect to deviations from an optimum. Journal of Genetics 30, 243–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yamazaki, T. & Hirose, Y. (1984). Genetic analysis of natural populations of Drosophila melanogaster. II. The measurement of fitness and fitness components in homozygous lines. Genetics 108, 213–221.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed