Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-gvh9x Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-20T08:11:35.807Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Resistance to meiotic drive at the MD locus in an Indian wild population of Aedes aegypti

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2009

S. G. Suguna ,
R. J. Wood ,
C. F. Curtis ,
A. Whitelaw  and
S. J. Kazmi
S. G. Suguna
Affiliation:
WHO/ICMR Research Unit on Genetic Control of Mosquitoes, New Delhi, India
R. J. Wood
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, Manchester University, Manchester M13 9PL, U.K.
C. F. Curtis
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, Manchester University, Manchester M13 9PL, U.K.
A. Whitelaw
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, Manchester University, Manchester M13 9PL, U.K.
S. J. Kazmi
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, Manchester University, Manchester M13 9PL, U.K.

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.

Females from an Indian wild population of Aedes aegypti were crossed to males carrying the sex ratio distorter factor MD which shows meiotic drive. Progenies from F1 males were tested for sex ratio distortion, i.e. the chromosomes from the wild females were screened for their resistance to the action of MD. The distribution of sex ratio in the progenies of different F1 males indicated a polymorphism in the wild population for resistant and sensitive variants of the X chromosome. Seven discrete categories of X appear to exist, associated with sex ratios ranging from 50% ♀ to less than 1·25% ♀. The overall level of resistance varied slightly but significantly in different parts of a town. The results are discussed in relation to the use of sex ratio distortion for genetic control of mosquitoes.

Type
Research Article
Information
Genetics Research , Volume 29 , Issue 2 , April 1977 , pp. 123 - 132
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1977

References

REFERENCES

Craig, G. B., Hickey, W. A. & VandeHey, (1960). An inherited male producing factor in Aedes aegypti. Science 132, 1887–1889.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Curtis, C. F., Grover, K. K., Suguna, S. G., Uppal, D. K., Dietz, K., Agarwal, H. V. & Kazmi, S. J. (1976). Comparative field cage tests of the population suppressing efficiency of three genetic control systems for Aedes aegypti. Heredity 36, 11–29.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fay, R. W. & Eliason, D. A. (1966). A preferred oviposition site as a surveillance method for Aedes aegypti. Mosquito News 26, 531–535.Google Scholar
Fisher, R. A. (1930). The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection. Oxford: Clarendon. Reprinted New York 1958: Dover.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, R. A. & Yates, F. (1963). Statistical Tables for Biological Agricultural and Medical Research, 6th ed.Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd.Google Scholar
Hamilton, W. D. (1967). Extraordinary sex ratios. Science 156, 477–488.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hickey, W. A. & Craig, G. B. (1966 a). Genetic distortion of sex ratio in the mosquito Aedes aegypti. Genetics 53, 1177–1196.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hickey, W. A. & Craig, G. B. (1966 b). Distortion of sex ratio in populations of Aedes aegypti. Canadian Journal of Genetics and Cytology 8, 260–278.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hickey, W. A. (1970). Factors influencing the distortion of sex ratio in Aedes aegypti. Journal of Medical Entomology 7, 727–735.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lorimer, N., Hallinan, E. & Rai, K. S. (1972). Translocation homozygotes in the yellow fever mosquito Aedes aegypti. Journal of Heredity 63, 159–166.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McClelland, G. A. H. (1960). A preliminary study of the genetics of abdominal colour variations in Aedes aegypti (L) (Diptera, Culicidae). Annals of Tropical Medicine and Parasitology, 54 (3), 305–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reuben, R., Panicker, K. N., Das, P. K., Kazmi, S. J. & Suguna, S. G. (1976). A new paddle for the black jar ovitrap for surveillance of Aedes aegypti. Indian Journal of Medical Research (in the press).Google Scholar
Reuben, R., Das, P. K., Samuel, D. & Brooks, G. D. (1975). Estimation of daily emergence of Ae. aegypti in Sonepat, India. WHO/VBC 75.554 (unpublished WHO document).Google Scholar
Sokal, R. R. & Rohlf, F. J. (1969). Biometry. San Francisco: Freeman.Google Scholar
Suguna, S. G. & Curtis, C. F. (1974). Sex ratio distorter strains in Aedes aegypti. Journal of Communicable Diseases 6, 102–103.Google Scholar
Suguna, S. G., Kazmi, S. J. & Curtis, C. F. (1977). Sex ratio distorter – translocation homozygotes in Aedes aegypti. WHO/VBC 75.542. Genetica (in the Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Borstel, R. C. & Buzzatti, Traverso (1962). On the role of lethal mutants in the control of populations. Proceedings of Colloquium of Radioisotopes and Radiation Entomology, Bombay, India, 1960. I.A.E.A., Vienna.Google Scholar
Wood, R. J. (1961). Biological and genetical studies on sex ratio in DDT resistant and susceptible strains of Aedes aegypti Linn. Genetica Agraria 13 (3–4), 287–307.Google Scholar
Wood, R. J. (1962). Some observations on sex ratio and on the frequency of larval mutant yellow in Aedes aegypti with particular reference to selection for early and late pupation. Genetica Agraria 16 (1–2), 15–26.Google Scholar
Wood, R. J. (1976). Between-family variation in sex ratio in the Trinidad (T30) strain of Aedes aegypti (L.) indicating differences in sensitivity to the meiotic drive gene M D. Genetica 46 (in the Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar