Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-7nlkj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-26T16:33:18.591Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The expression of ‘Hairless’ in Drosophila and the role of two closely linked modifiers of opposite effect

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2009

David Nash
David Nash
Affiliation:
Department of Genetics, Milton Road, Cambridge, England

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. Hairless (H), a dominant mutant of Drosophila melanogaster, affects the chaetae.

2. Various ‘intensities’ of effect are interpreted as representing different times in chaetal development at which deficiency of ‘+H substance’ is encountered. ‘Temperature effective period’ studies confirm this view.

3. The chaetae at different sites are liable to characteristically different ‘intensities’ of effect. In other words a particular site tends to be affected at a limited time in its development. If it is supposed that a single period of deficiency of +H substance accounts for effects on all chaetae, then it follows that development of the various chaetae is asynchronous. Some histological observations tend to support this prediction.

The implications of asynchrony with respect to pattern formation are discussed.

4. It is argued that the source of +H substance may be an endocrine organ, the ring-gland.

5. Two modifiers Su-H and E-H, whose expression and linkage relations are described in detail for the first time, are, it is suggested, respectively ‘constitutive’ and ‘super-repressed’ mutations of a ‘regulator’ locus controlling negative feed-back on the +H locus.

Type
Research Article
Information
Genetics Research , Volume 6 , Issue 2 , July 1965 , pp. 175 - 189
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1965

References

REFERENCES

Bridges, C. B. & Brehme, K. S. (1944). The Mutants of Drosophila melanogaster. Washington, D.C.: Carnegie Institution.Google Scholar
Child, G. P. (1935). Phenogenetic studies on scute-1 of Drosophila melanogaster II. The temperature effective period. Genetics, 20, 127–155.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Falk, R. (1963). A search for a gene control mechanism in Drosophila. Amer. Nat. 97, 129–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldschmidt, R. (1938). Physiological Genetics. New York: McGraw-Hill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gowen, J. W. (1933). Constitutional effects of the hairless gene in diploid and triploid Drosophila. Amer. Nat. 67, 178–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lees, A. D. & Waddington, C. H. (1942). The development of the bristles in normal and some mutant types of Drosophila melanogaster. Proc. roy. Soc. B, 131, 87–110.Google Scholar
Monod, J. & Jacob, F. (1961). General conclusions: Teleonomic mechanisms in cellular metabolism, growth and differentiation. Cold Spr. Harb. Symp. quant. Biol. 26, 389–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nash, D. (1963). Selection and the Hairless mutant of Drosophila. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Cambridge, England.Google Scholar
Plunkett, C. R. (1926). The interaction of genetic and environmental factors in development. J. exp. Zool. 46, 181–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rendel, J. M. (1959). Canalisation of the scute phenotype of Drosophila. Evolution, 13, 425–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, C. W. (1936). Metamorphosis of Drosophila melanogaster including an accurately timed account of the principal morphological changes. J. Morph. 59, 351–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, J. M. (1959). Continuous, quantised and modal variation. Proc. roy. Soc. B, 397–409.Google Scholar
Smith, J. M. & Sondhi, K. C. (1960). The genetics of a pattern. Genetics, 45, 1039–1050.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spickett, S. G. (1963). Genetic and developmental studies of a quantitative character. Nature, Lond., 199, 870–873.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stern, C. (1954). Two or three bristles. Amer. Scient. 42, 213–247.Google Scholar
Sturtevant, A. H. (1961). Bristle pattern in Drosophila. Science, 134, 1436.Google Scholar