Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-qxdb6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T14:54:20.862Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effects of population size and selection intensity in selection for a quantitative character in Drosophila: I. Short-term response to selection

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. The response to selection for increased number of bristles on one abdominal segment was studied over 12 generations using a factorial design of three population sizes (10, 20 and 40 pairs of parents) and five selection intensities (10, 20, 40, 80% and controls).

2. The responses on the average agreed well with those expected from the estimated base population heritability, but individual replicates diverged considerably.

3. Larger populations tended to give greater response to selection, due mainly to larger realized heritabilities.

4. There was no consistent effect of selection intensity on realized heritability.

5. For populations with the same number of individuals scored, less intense selection gave greater realized heritabilities.

Type
Research Article
Information
Genetics Research , Volume 12 , Issue 3 , December 1968 , pp. 237 - 248
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1968

References

REFERENCES

Becker, W. A. (1964). Manual of Procedures in Quantitative Genetics. Pullman: Washington State University.Google Scholar
Chung, C. S. & Chapman, A. B. (1958). Comparisons of the predicted with actual gains from selection of parents of inbred progeny of rats. Genetics 43, 594–600.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Claringbold, P. J. & Barker, J. S. F. (1961). The estimation of relative fitness of Droso-phila populations. J. Theoret. Biol. 1, 190–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clayton, G. A., Morris, J. A. & Robertson, A. (1957). An experimental check on quantitative genetical theory. I. Short-term responses to selection. J. Genet. 55, 131–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dempster, E. R. (1955). Genetic models in relation to animal breeding. Biometrics 11, 535–536.Google Scholar
Enfield, F. D., Comstock, R. E. & Braskerud, O. (1966). Selection for pupa weight in Tribolium castaneum. I. Parameters in base populations. Genetics 54, 523–533.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Falconer, D. S. (1960). Introduction to Quantitative Genetics. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd.Google Scholar
Fhankham, 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. III. Analyses of the lines. Genet. Res. 12, 267–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gill, J. L. (1965). A Monte Carlo evaluation of predicted selection response. Aust. J. biol. Sci. 18, 999–1007.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Griffing, B. (1960). Accommodation of linkage in mass selection theory. Aust. J. biol. Sci. 13, 501–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hetzer, H. O. (1954). Effectiveness of selection for extension of black spotting in Beltsville no. 1 swine. J. Hered. 45, 215–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hetzer, H. O., Zeller, J. H. & Hine, R. L. (1958). Three generations of selection for high and low fatness in Duroc swine. Proc. X Int. Congr. Genet. 2, 119.Google Scholar
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
Latter, B. D. H. (1964). Selection for a threshold character in Drosophila. I. An analysis of the phenotypic variance on the underlying scale. Genet. Res. 5, 198–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lerner, I. M. & Hazel, L. N. (1947). Population genetics of a poultry flock under artificial selection. Genetics 32, 325–339.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lewis, W. L. & Warwick, E. J. (1953). Effectiveness of selection for body weight in mice from inbred and outbred populations derived from common parent stocks. J. Hered. 44, 233–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, G. A. & Bell, A. E. (1960). An experimental check on the accuracy of prediction of response during selection. In Biometrical Genetics, pp. 178–187. Ed. Kempthorne, O., London: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Rathie, K. A. (1967). An investigation of methods of selection for quantitative characters in Drosophila melanogaster. M.Sc.Agr. Thesis, University of Sydney.Google Scholar
Robertson, A. (1966). Artificial selection in plants and animals. Proc. Roy. Soc. B 164, 341–349.Google ScholarPubMed
Sheldon, B. L. (1963). Studies in artificial selection on 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. App. Genet. 38 (in the press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
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