Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-5g6vh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T07:42:38.271Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Are responses to artificial selection for reproductive fitness characters consistently asymmetrical*?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2009

R. Frankham
R. Frankham
Affiliation:
School of Biological Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW 2109, Australia
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.

Non-linear offspring-parent regressions and heritabilities are expected for characters showing genetic asymmetry due to directional dominance and/or asymmetrical gene frequencies. Since reproductive fitness characters exhibit these characteristics, they should show consistently nonlinear heritabilities, with greater heritabilities in the direction of lower fitness. As a consequence, responses to bi-directional selection on fitness traits should be asymmetrical in the same direction. This prediction has been tested by an analysis of published bi-directional selection experiments for reproductive fitness traits. Significant asymmetry (24 of 30 studies) in the predicted direction was found. For studies reporting realized heritabilities, the means were 0·173 and 0·259 for lines selected for higher and lower reproductive fitness, respectively, the high lines being 33% less than the low lines. Asymmetry was evident for studies reporting realized heritabilities and for those with random mating controls of the same size as the selection lines. Consequently, it is argued that the asymmetry results from genetic asymmetries. This asymmetry has important implications in the improvement of reproductive fitness traits in plant and animal breeding.

Type
Research Article
Information
Genetics Research , Volume 56 , Issue 1 , August 1990 , pp. 35 - 42
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1990

References

Abplanalp, H. (1961). Linear heritability estimates. Genetical Research 21, 439–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arthur, J. A. & Abplanalp, H. (1975). Linear estimates of heritability and genetic correlation for egg production, body weight, conformation and egg weight of turkeys. Poultry Science 54, 11–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bakker, K. (1969). Selection for rate of growth and its influence on competitive ability of larvae of Drosophila melanogaster. Netherlands Journal of Zoology 19, 541–595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bulmer, M. G. (1980). The Mathematical Theory of Quantitative Genetics. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Charlesworth, B. (1980). Evolution in Age-Structured Populations. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Charlesworth, B. (1987). The heritability of fitness. In Sexual Selection: Testing the Alternatives (ed. Bradbury, J. W. and Andersson, M. B.), pp. 21–40. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Charlesworth, D. & Charlesworth, B. (1987). Inbreeding depression and its evolutionary consequences. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 18, 237–268.Google Scholar
Clarke, J. M., Maynard, Smith J. & Sondhi, K. C. (1961). Asymmetrical response to selection for rate of development in Drosophila subobscura. Genetical Research 2, 70–81.Google Scholar
Costantino, R. F., Bell, A. E. & Rogler, J. C. (1967). Genetic analysis of a population of Tribolium. Heredity 22, 529–539.Google Scholar
Crow, J. F. & Kimura, M. (1970). An Introduction to Population Genetics Theory. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Curnow, R. N. (1960). The regression of true value on estimated value. Biometrika 47, 457–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawson, P. S. (1965). Genetic homeostasis and developmental rate in Tribolium. Genetics 51, 873–885.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dawson, P. S. (1975). Directional versus stabilising selection for developmental time in natural and laboratory populations of flour beetles. Genetics 80, 773–783.Google Scholar
de la Fuente, L. F. & San Primitivo, F. (1985). Selection for large and small litter size of the first three litters of mice. Génétique, Selection, Evolution 17, 251–264.Google Scholar
Drickamer, L. C. (1981). Selection for age of sexual maturation in mice and the consequences for population regulation. Behavioral and Neural Biology 31, 82–89.Google Scholar
Englert, D. C. & Bell, A. E. (1970). Selection for time of pupation in Tribolium castaneum. Genetics 64, 541–552.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Falconer, D. S. (1954). Asymmetrical responses in selection experiments. In Symposium on the Genetics of Population Structure, pp. 16–41. Naples: International Union of Biological Sciences, Series B, no. 15.Google Scholar
Falconer, D. S. (1955). Patterns of response in selection experiments with mice. Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative Biology 20, 178–196.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Falconer, D. S. (1965). Maternal effects and selection response. In Genetics Today, Vol. 3 (ed. Geerts, S. J.), pp. 767–773. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Falconer, D. S. (1971). Improvement of litter size in a strain of mice at a selection limit. Genetical Research 17, 215–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falconer, D. S. (1989). Introduction to Quantitative Genetics, 3rd edn.London: Longman.Google Scholar
Fisher, R. A. (1930). The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Frankham, R. (1982). Contribution of Drosophila research to quantitative genetics and animal breeding. Proceedings of the 2nd World Congress on Genetics Applied to Livestock Production V, 43–56.Google Scholar
Frankham, R. & Nurthen, R. K. (1981). Forging links between population and quantitative genetics. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 59, 251–263.Google Scholar
Frankham, R., Yoo, B. H. & Sheldon, B. L. (1988). Reproductive fitness and artificial selection in animal breeding: culling on fitness prevents a decline in reproductive fitness in lines of Drosophila melanogaster selected for increased inebriation time. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 76, 909–914.Google Scholar
Gimelfarb, A. (1986). Offspring-parent genotypic regression: how linear is it. Biometrics 42, 67–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gowe, R. S. (1983). Lessons from selection studies in poultry for animal breeders. Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Breeders' Roundtable, pp. 22–50.Google Scholar
Gustafsson, L. (1986). Lifetime reproductive success and heritability: empirical support for Fisher's fundamental theorem. American Naturalist 128, 761–764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, W. G. (1978). Estimation of heritability by regression using collateral relatives: linear heritability estimation. Genetical Research 32, 265–274.Google Scholar
Hudak, M. J. & Gromko, M. H. (1989). Responses to selection for early and late development of sexual maturity in Drosophila melanogaster. Animal Behaviour 38, 344–351.Google Scholar
Hunter, P. E. (1959). Selection of Drosophila melanogaster for length of larval period. Zeitschrift für Vererbungslehre 90, 7–28.Google Scholar
Joakimsen, O. & Baker, R. L. (1977). Selection for litter size in mice. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica 27, 301–318.Google Scholar
Kempthorne, O. (1960). Biometrical relationships between relatives and selection theory. In Biometrical Genetics (ed. Kempthorne, O.), pp. 12–23. London: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Kessler, S. (1969). The genetics of Drosophila mating behaviour. II. The genetic architecture of mating speed in Drosophila pseudoobscura. Genetics 62, 421–433.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kimura, M. (1958). On the change of population fitness by natural selection. Heredity 12, 145–167.Google Scholar
Kojima, K. (1961). Effects of dominance and size of population on response to mass selection. Genetical Research 2, 177–188.Google Scholar
Kojima, K. & Kelleher, T. M. (1961). Changes in mean fitness in random mating populations when linkage and epistasis are present. Genetics 46, 527–540.Google Scholar
Lambio, A. L. (1981). Response to divergent selection for 4-week body weight, egg production and total plasma phosphorus in Japanese quail. Dissertation Abstracts International B 42, 2694.Google Scholar
Land, R. B. & Falconer, D. S. (1969). Genetic studies of ovulation rate in the mouse. Genetical Research 13, 25–46.Google Scholar
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. Australian Journal of Biological Sciences 18, 585–598.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Latter, B. D. H. (1970). Selection in finite populations with multiple alleles. II. Centripetal selection, mutation, and isoallelic variation. Genetics 66, 165–186.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lewontin, R. C. (1974). The Genetic Basis of Evolutionary Change. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Maki-Tanila, A. (1982). The validity of the heritability concept in quantitative genetics. PhD Thesis, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Manning, A. (1961). The effects of artificial selection for mating speed in Drosophila melanogaster. Animal Behaviour 11, 116–120.Google Scholar
Manning, A. (1963). Selection for mating speed in Drosophila melanogaster based on the behaviour of one sex. Animal Behaviour 11, 116–120.Google Scholar
Marien, D. (1958). Selection for developmental rate in Drosophila pseudoobscura. Genetics 50, 3–15.Google Scholar
Medrano, J. F. & Abplanalp, H. (1989). Prediction of selection response in asymmetrically distributed traits from selection components. Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics 106, 110–119.Google Scholar
Meyer, H. H. & Enfield, F. D. (1975). Experimental evidence on limitations of the heritability parameter. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 45, 268–273.Google Scholar
Moriwaki, D. & Fuyama, Y. (1963). Responses to selection for rate of development in D. melanogaster. Drosophila Information Service 38, 74.Google Scholar
Mousseau, T. A. & Roff, D. A. (1987). Natural selection and the heritability of fitness components. Heredity 59, 181–197.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Naglaki, T. (1979). Selection in dioecious populations. Annals of Human Genetics 43, 143–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Narain, P., Joshi, C. & Prabhu, S. S. (1962). Response to selection for fecundity in D. melanogaster. Drosophila Information Service 36, 96–99.Google Scholar
Nishida, A. (1972). Some characteristics of parent-offspring regression in body weight of Mus musculus at different ages. Canadian Journal of Genetics and Cytology 14, 292–303.Google Scholar
Nishida, A. & Abe, T. (1974). The distribution of genetic and environmental effects and the linearity of heritability. Canadian Journal of Genetics and Cytology 16, 3–10.Google Scholar
Richardson, R. H., Kojima, K. & Lucas, H. L. (1968). An analysis of short-term selection experiments. Heredity 23, 493–506.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robertson, A. (1955). Selection in animals: synthesis. Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative Biology 20, 225–229.Google Scholar
Robertson, A. (1961). Inbreeding in artificial selection programmes. Genetical Research 2, 189–194.Google Scholar
Robertson, A. (1977). The non-linearity of offspring-parent regression. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Quantitative Genetics (ed. Pollak, E., Kempthorne, O. and Bailey, T. B.), pp. 297–304. Ames: Iowa State University Press.Google Scholar
Roff, D. A. & Mousseau, T. A. (1987). Quantitative genetics and fitness: lessons from Drosophila. Heredity 58, 103–118.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sang, J. H. (1962). Selection for rate of development using Drosophila melanogaster cultured axenically on deficient diets. Genetical Research 3, 90–109.Google Scholar
Sang, J. H. & Clayton, G. A. (1957). Selection for larval development time in Drosophila. Journal of Heredity 48, 265–270.Google Scholar
Sewell, D., Burnett, B. & Connolly, K. (1975). Genetic analysis of larval feeding behaviour in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetical Research 24, 163–173.Google Scholar
Sherwin, R. N. (1975). Selection for mating activity in two chromosomal arrangements of Drosophila pseudoobscura. Evolution 29, 519–530.Google Scholar
Siegel, P. B. (1965). Genetics of behavior: selection for mating ability in chickens. Genetics 52, 1269–1277.Google Scholar
Siegel, P. B. (1980). Behavior genetic analysis in chickens and quail. Proceedings of the 29th National Breeders' Roundtable, pp. 1–13.Google Scholar
Smith, K. P. & Bohren, B. B. (1974). Direct and correlated responses to selection for hatching time in the fowl. British Poultry Science 15, 597–604.Google Scholar
Soliman, M. H. (1982). Directional and stabilising selection for developmental time and correlated response in reproductive fitness in Tribolium castaneum. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 63, 111–116.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spiess, E. B. & Spiess, L. B. (1966). Selection for rate of development and gene arrangement frequencies in Drosophila persimilis. II. Fitness properties at equilibrium. Genetics 53, 695–708.Google Scholar
Spuhler, K. P., Crumpacker, D. W., Williams, J. S. & Bradley, B. P. (1978). Response to selection for mating speed and changes in gene arrangement frequencies in descendants from a single population of Drosophila pseudoobscura. Genetics 89, 729–749.Google Scholar
Tindell, D. & Arze, C. G. (1965). Sexual maturity of male chickens selected for mating ability. Poultry Science 44, 70–72.Google Scholar
Turner, J. R. G. (1970). Changes in mean fitness under natural selection. In Mathematical Topics in Population Genetics (ed. Kojima, K.), pp. 32–78. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar